Blowback, 9-11, and cover-ups (2008)

Blowback, 9/11, And Cover-Ups

Rodney Stich

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups iiCopyright 2008 by Silverpeak Enterprises, a Nevada Corporation,

PO Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507.

All rights reserved. Short segments of this book may be reproduced by a newspaper, magazine, reviewer, or on the Internet, making reference to the book and the author. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: pending Stich, Rodney—Author Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups ISBN: 978-0-932438-15-7 1. Terrorism—9/11. 2. Aviation safety—corruption. 3. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 4. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). 5. United States—terrorism. 6. Terrorism. Books by Rodney Stich with Print book ISBN numbers: America’s Housing & Financial Frauds (978-0-932438-54-6) Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-ups, 1st ed. (978-0-932438-15-7) Congress and Other U.S. Cesspools (978-0-932438-29-4) Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, and the Mafia (978-0-932438-26-3) David Vs. Goliath: 9/11 & Other Tragedies (978-0-932438-25-6) Defrauding America, 4th ed. Vol. One (978-0-932438-18-8) Defrauding America, 4th ed. Vol. Two (978-0-932438-19-5) Disavow: A CIA Saga of Betrayal (978-0-932438-17-1) Drugging America, 2nd ed. (978-0-932438-11-9) Explosive Secrets of Covert CIA Companies (978-0-932438-23-2) FBI, CIA, the Mob, and Treachery (978-0-932438-24-9) Iraq, Lies, Cover-ups, and Consequences, (978-0-932438-22-5) Lawyers and Judge: American Trojan Horses (978-0-932438-16-4) Subverting America, Vol. One (978-0-932438-20-1) Subverting America, Vol. Two (978-0-932438-21-8) Terrorism Against America, (978-0-932438-14-0) Those Ugly Americans: 20th & 21st Centuries (978-0-932438-01-0) Unfriendly Skies” 20th & 21st Centuries (978-0-932438-31-7) November 1, 2008.

Blowback, 9/11, Cover-Ups, and Consequences

iii

DEDICATION

This book is dedicated to, and an attempt to inform, the American peo-ple of the continuing history of corrupt activities by key people in each of the branches of government, the great human tragedies caused and allowed to occur by this conduct, and the cover-ups by virtually every government and non-government check and balance.


v

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-ups

Contents

Chapters Titles Pages 1. Early History of Fraud-Related Airline Disasters ............ 1 2. Years of Judicial and Media Cover-Ups ........................... 19 3. History of Preventable Hijackings.................................... 49 4. DOJ’s Ripple Effects: 1993 WTC Bombing..................... 83 5. First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack .......................... 141 6. Ripple Effects on 9/11 ...................................................... 191 7. Another Terrorist Aviation Disaster? ................................ 221 8. Continuing FBI-DOJ Cultural Problems .......................... 231 9. Post 9/11 Cover-ups ......................................................... 287 10. Conspiracy Theorists Interfere With the Truth ................. 403 11. Second Phase of Complicity by Federal Judges ............... 411 12. Media Complicity ........................................................... 425 13. Gloomy Outlook for Americans ....................................... 433 Index ............................................................................. 439


vii

The Author’s Background and Credentials The author and activist against corruption in government, Rodney

Stich, has an unusual background for exposing corruption in the various government entities that adversely affects the security of the United States and the lives of the men, women and children in America.

Aviation Experience Started Before the Pearl Harbor Attack Aviation Background Started Before the Pearl Harbor Attack The author’s background in aviation started while he was in the

U.S. Navy, prior to the December 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. He joined the Navy at the age of 17 and eventually became a Naval Avia-tor, receiving his Navy wings first as a Naval Aviation Pilot (enlisted pilot) and then as a Naval aviator (commissioned officer).

He became an instructor in advanced PBY training at Jacksonville, Florida, and then designation as a Patrol Plane Commander in the Navy PB4Y-1 (Liberator) and PB4Y-2 (Privateer). Stich was the youngest Navy Patrol Plane Commander during World War II. Worldwide Commercial Airline Experience

After World War II, Stich flew for the airlines in domestic and in-ternational operations, and was checked out as captain on virtually every type of plane flown by U.S. airlines. These include the double-deck Boeing Stratocruiser, Lockheed Super Constellation, DC-4, DC-3, Martin 202, Convair 340, Curtis C-46, Lockheed Electra, DC-8, and Convair 880.

He was one of the first pilots licensed by Japan, holding Japanese pilot license number 170. He was also one of the first captains for Ja-pan Airlines, during which time his copilots were former Japanese mili-tary pilots from World War II.

The Saturday Evening Post had written a series of three articles in 1950 about the pilots at his primary airline, Transocean Airlines, enti-tled “The Daring Young Men Of Transocean Airlines.” Author Ernie Gann was a pilot for the same airline.

In those days, flying overseas, especially in the Middle East, were pioneering experiences, encountering situations that no airline pilot today encounters. In one instance, in 1953, Stich found himself at the center of a revolution in Iran, which he later learned was engineered by the CIA. He flew Muslim pilgrims to Mecca and Medina during the Muslim holy period called the Hajj. He flew pilgrims to Medina, where he landed in the desert outside of the holy city. During these two peri-ods in 1953 and 1953, he resided in Jerusalem, Ramallah, Beirut, Te-hran, and Abadan. He visited Palestine refugee camps, and associated with the residents who were, in those days, friendly to the Americans.

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups viiiHe had his share of inflight emergencies, including engine fail-

ures, engine fires, sudden closing of virtually all airports at his destination, serious icing problems on the North Atlantic, sudden shortage of fuel when the head winds over long over-water flights became more adverse than forecast.

Aviation Safety Agent for Federal Government Eventually he left airline flying and became a federal aviation

safety agent for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). He con-ducted flight checks of airline pilots, evaluated their competency, is-sued government ratings, evaluated safety matters and prepared reports on safety problems and recommended corrective actions.

Assignment To Halt Worst Series of Air Disasters in U.S. History Eventually, the federal government gave him the assignment to cor-

rect the conditions causing the worst series of airline crashes in the na-tion’s history. It was here that he discovered the deadly politics of air safety and corruption in government offices. To circumvent the blocks preventing the federal government from carrying out its aviation safety responsibilities, Stich exercised legal remedies in ways that had never before been done. He acted as an independent counsel, conducting hearings to obtain testimony and additional evidence that showed the deep-seated corruption in the government’s aviation safety offices that enabled many preventable aviation tragedies to occur.

The events of September 11, 2001, were simply an extension of the preventable airline disasters that had preceded them for the prior four decades. Forty years of fatal hijackings could have been prevented if the corrupt culture in the government’s aviation safety offices had not existed, and which still exists.

Unable to correct the serious problems, Stich left government ser-vices and engaged in various activities seeking to publicize and force corrective actions. Like a magnet, these activities caused other former and present government agents and insiders to provide him with addi-tional information and evidence of corruption in government offices far beyond the aviation field. These were agents from the CIA, DEA, DIA, FBI, Customs, Secret Service, drug smugglers, and organized crime figures.

Details Of Aviation and Other Activities • Over 50 years of aviation experience covering many sophisticated

areas of air safety. In World War II he was a Navy pilot, flight in-structor, and patrol plane commander (PPC). After the war, he was an airline captain in domestic and overseas aviation, one of the first pilots licensed by Japan (# 170), helping to start up Japan Airlines.


ix

He was a federal air safety inspector, holding air safety responsi-bilities for the most senior program at the world’s largest airline at that time, United Airlines.

• Piloting experience in the Middle East during the 1950s, flying as captain from Beirut, Jerusalem, Tehran, Abadan, Bagdad, Jidda, and landing in the desert outside of Medina with Moslem pilgrims on the Hajj. He lived in the Middle East during these periods and visited Palestinian refugee camps.

• Navy pilot and flight instructor in multi-engine aircraft from 1943 to 1946. He received his Navy wings at Pensacola when George Bush, Sr. received his wings at Corpus Christi. He started his 60 years in sophisticated military and airline aviation as a radioman on a Navy PBY prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. After the war, he was a pilot for the newly formed Japan Airlines, and had as co-pilots some of the Japanese pilots who bombed Pearl Harbor and with whom he fought halfway between the islands of Midway and Wake. He is believed to be the youngest Navy Patrol Plane Com-mander in World War II, being commander of Navy Liberators and Privateers and pilot instructor in PBY advanced flying, all at the age of 21.

• Airline captain from 1950 to 1967, flying in domestic and overseas operations. (Transocean Airlines; Seaboard and Western Air-lines/Seaboard and World Airlines; California Eastern; California Central; California Western; United States Overseas Airline; Flying Tigers; Japan Airlines; Air Djibouti; Air Jordan. The reason for multiple airlines was due to occasional pilot farming out from original airline (Transocean airlines) and due to the frequent pilot furloughs in the earlier days of commercial aviation.) Stich was in Iran the morning in 1953 when the U.S. government was undermin-ing another foreign government, using the CIA to overthrow the prime minister of Iran, Mohammed Mosaddeq and install the U.S. puppet, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. At that time, Stich did not recognize that relationship.

• Middle East experience as an airline captain, which includes flying Muslim pilgrims to Mecca and Medina, visiting Palestinian refugee camps, residing in Ramallah, Jerusalem, Beirut, and other Middle East countries. This experience provides him with a more accurate understanding of the Middle East problems.

• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air carrier operations in-spector, responsible for air safety at several major airlines, conduct-ing flight checks of airline pilots, issuing aircraft ratings to airline pilots, making safety recommendations, inspecting and insuring

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups xthat airlines meet federal air safety requirements, investigating

aircraft incidents and accidents and making reports on them. Air-lines at which Stich conducted pilot and flight engineer checks in-cluded United, TWA, Eastern, Northwest, among others.

• Acted as special prosecutor while an FAA inspector-investigator, forcing an unprecedented four-month-long hearing upon the FAA during which time testimony and hard evidence were presented that proved the existence of corruption related to a series of fatal airline crashes.

• Filed federal lawsuits authorized and required by federal law to prove the relationship between serious air safety and criminal vio-lations and a series of specific airline crashes.

• Made several safety procedures while an FAA inspector that are standard today at many airlines. These include high altitude jet up-set avoidance procedures, procedures to avoid inadvertent descent into the ground, procedure to minimize the large altitude loss fol-lowing stall of air carrier aircraft, pre-takeoff briefing procedures.

• Author of books intended to inform the segment of the public ca-pable and interested in being informed of hardcore corruption in government and seeking to motivate the few who can exercise courage and responsibility that is so lacking in today’s America. His books include multiple editions of Unfriendly Skies, Defraud-ing America, Drugging America, and others.

• Television series were twice considered for his books. The first occasion was when producer Jackie Cooper planned a three-part television series following release of the first edition of Unfriendly Skies and twice in the late 1990s.

• Guest and air safety expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows in the United States, Canada, Germany, Holland, and Mex-ico.

Expertise In Other Areas Of Corruption In Government • Acquired dozens of sources over the past 20 years who provided

him with precise information, documentation, affidavits, relating to other areas of corruption in the three branches of the federal gov-ernment and in the California courts. These sources include present and former government agents, including agents of the FBI, DEA, Customs, Secret Service, CIA, including the former heads of secret CIA airlines and secret CIA financial operations. This corruption is detailed in the various books that he wrote and the primary Internet site: www.defraudingamerica.com.

• Acquired huge quantities of documentation relating to widespread hard-core corruption in the federal courts, including obstruction of justice, widespread violations of civil and constitutional rights as


xi

part of the judicial pattern blocking the reporting of criminal activi-ties in key judicial and other government offices. These are matters inflicting great harm upon national interests, and the evidence could be used to force badly needed changes to the courts and in the interest of justice.

• Documented material that exposes the corruption in the Federal Courts, Justice Department, and Congress, that has been kept from the public.

Federal Aviation Administration Certificates • Airline Transport Pilot (503896); type ratings in the DC-8 jet;

Convair 880/990 jet; Curtis C-46; DC-3, DC-4, Convair 240-340-440; Martin 202-404; Boeing Stratocruiser (B-377); Lock-heed Constellation (749-1049-1649); and considerable flying experience in the Lockheed Electra (from which the Navy EP-3 was derived), Boeing 720, DC-6, and DC-7.

• Japanese Airline Transport Pilot (# 170), one of the first pilot li-censes issued by Japan, issued in 1952.

• Navy aircraft flown: PBY--as instructor in advanced PBY training at Jacksonville, Florida; Plane commander (PPC) in Liberator (B-24) and Privateer (PB4Y2); SNB (D-18); SNJ (AT-6); BT-13 and Stearman.

Background for discovering covert activities Starting in 1989, Stich became a confidant to a large number of

CIA and other deep-cover operatives, during which he spent over 2,000 hours in deposition-like questioning, receiving thousands of letters, documents, and affidavits describing and supporting the activities which he writes about in his books and which supplement what he per-sonally discovered as a federal and then private investigator (and as an international airline pilot).

Included in his many insider friends and sources are the heads of former CIA proprietary airlines and financial institutions, pilots who flew arms from the United States and drugs back, people who were in-volved in drug-money laundering, looting of savings and loans, and other activities ordered by their deep-cover superiors.

This combination of government investigator background and large number of friends and confidants involved in deep-cover activities for the past forty years gives the author an unusual amount and source of information and insight into the normally highly compartmentalized area of covert activities.

Possibly because of his military pilot and airline pilot background, combined with his considerable work in exposing government corrup-tion, dozens of present and former government agents and operatives,

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups xiiformer drug traffickers, and others, have provided Stich during the

last ten years with huge amounts of data, documentation, and clarifica-tion on corrupt activities in government. This is the detailed informa-tion that is found in his various books.

Joined By Dozens Of Other Government Agents His aggressive exposing of serious corruption implicating federal

officials exposed further government corruption. In addition, other fed-eral agents started revealing to Stich the corrupt activities of federal personnel in other areas. This information and documentation provided caused Stich to write other books, again attempting to inform and moti-vate the public to exercise some form of personal responsibility.

Over a period of years, since the mid-1980s, these sources included agents of the CIA, FBI, DEA, ONI, Customs, INS, and other govern-ment agencies, and other insiders. Today, his sources number in excess of fifty and continue to increase.

Over 3,000 Radio and Television Appearances In attempting to inform the people of the misconduct and the hu-

man tragedies arising from it, Stich has appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows in the United States, Canada, and Europe, since 1978.

The information provided in this and other books that he wrote could be one of the most valuable tools to fight the escalating destruc-tion within government offices and elsewhere.

For more information put “Rodney Stich” into Internet search en-gines such as www.google.com. Additional formation about Stich can be found at www.defraudingamerica.com.


xiii

The author in his plane, before it was seized, along with his home and all of his life’s assets, as part of multiple schemes to block his ex-posure of corruption in government offices.


xv

INTRODUCTION

his book, Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-ups, presents detailed and often documented information on areas of corruption in the three branches of government that made the tragedies of 9/11 possible.

Much of the information in this book is based upon what the author, Rodney Stich, discovered during his professional and official duties as a key federal aviation safety inspector and investigator, and what was discovered by a number of other government insiders. These include former agents of the FAA, FBI, INS, Customs, CIA, DEA, and others.

This book addresses the people and the government entities holding primary blame for the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11, and then the people and entities with the secondary blame.

The people and government entities that have primary blame are those responsible for aviation safety, being the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). I describe the long history of these problems in my book, Un-friendly Skies, and particularly the fourth edition. This area of primary blame has been carefully covered up and avoid by congressional hear-ings and the 9/11 Commission.

The secondary areas of blame have been partly addressed; the fail-ure of intelligence and the failure to act on known intelligence. But here they, as usual, covered up for the culture of corruption in the FBI and CIA that obviously affected its interest or capability of addressing those who threaten the United States.

A third area of blame are those people who knew of the problems, of the corruption, the culture, and covered up, both before and after the events of 9/11.

All of the books address these problems, and this one will high-light several of the problems with examples. This third area includes the following: • Federal judges who repeatedly blocked the author and other former

government insiders from reporting the criminal activities that they discovered as part of their professional and legal duties, further compounding their obstruction of justice with retaliatory actions.

• Lawyers and law firms, including at least one CIA-front, that en-gaged in a bizarre scheme to halt the attempts by former federal agent Rodney Stich to report and expose the corruption.

• Members of Congress whose decades of cover-ups made many tra-gedies possible.

• People in the broadcast and print media who repeatedly engaged in cover-ups.

T

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups xviThe examples given in these pages are only a few of the many other

examples that the author has detailed in his other books, including Un-friendly Skies, Defrauding America, and Drugging America.

If the contents of this book—and the others—are understood, it will be apparent that there are very serious problems within the federal gov-ernment and in certain segments of society that are undermining the United States, and will continue to be responsible for great harm to the people and to the country.

Blowback, 9/11, And Cover-Ups

Rodney Stich

CHAPTER ONE

Early History of Fraud-Related Airline Disasters

ery few people remember the frequent occurrences of aviation disasters, including aircraft hijackings, occurring in the later half of the Twentieth Century. And virtually no one knows of

the deep-seated corruption in the government’s aviation safety offices that caused or made many of them possible. And virtually no one real-izes the blowback consequences of the deep-seated misconduct in cer-tain segments of the government’s aviation safety offices with the hi-jackings of 9/11.

This information has been kept from the people by members of Congress and the 9/11 Commission. To have done otherwise would have exposed, instead of oversights, would have exposed corrupt and criminal activities by people in several areas of government as it af-fected the events of 9/11, but would go far beyond that area.

In each of the four editions of my Unfriendly Skies, I detail and document these problems as I discovered them while holding a key po-sition in the government’s aviation safety offices. It is the cover-up of this misconduct that has brought about such tragedies as those of 9/11 and others that are not recognized for what they are.

The “Butterfly Effect” By understanding the facts, one of the bizarre aspects of the 9/11

hijackings is that the same underlying problems within the govern-ment’s aviation safety offices that resulted in a United Airlines DC-8 crash into the Brooklyn borough of New York City, the world’s worst air disaster at that time, also enabled to occur the 9/11 airline disasters. I had the government’s aviation safety responsibilities for that earlier disaster, and carefully documented the corruption that I and other gov-ernment agents had discovered.

V

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-ups 2

Symbiotic Corruption Between Key FAA and United Airlines Management That Enabled Many Preventable Airline Disasters It is ironic that United Airlines would suffer in both UAL crashes

into New York City due to misconduct by UAL personnel and that this misconduct either fostered considerable misconduct in the FAA—or vice versa.

This is how I started to discover and document the deep-seated cul-ture and misconduct within the government’s aviation safety offices and how it caused, or enabled to occur, decades of easily preventable airline disasters—including decades of easily preventable airline hi-jackings. While assigned to the Los Angeles air carrier district office, working with American Airlines and Western Airlines, I was asked to take on an assignment to correct serious problems that had resulted in a series of airline disasters at United Airlines, which I would discover implicated key people in the Federal Aviation Administration. The mis-conduct in one fed on the other, with tragic consequences in a series of related airline disasters.

Major Problems, Fraud, at United Airlines As soon as I took over the safety responsibilities for the most senior

program at United Airlines, I discovered what other inspectors had discovered for years. These included: • Not performing the government required training and competency

checks and then falsifying government required records to falsely indicate federal safety requirements were met. This went on for years, as inspector after inspector reported the serious problems—only to find themselves transferred or suffer various forms of re-taliation.

• Not performing the required emergency evacuation training of the pilots and flight engineers on the government mandated yearly ba-sis, doing it only every three years—and then only in part. These violations were covered up by falsifying government-required re-cords.

• Denying to pilots whose knowledge and proficiency were far below acceptable levels the remedial training that was required. One of several fatal airline disasters occurring in my immediate area of federal aviation safety responsibilities resulted from these federal offenses.

• United Airlines check pilots had very low competency standards, allowing unsatisfactory pilots and flight engineers to be graded as satisfactory when they were below industry standards and below government mandated standards.

• United Airlines management personnel threatening government

Early History of Fraud-Related Airline Disasters 3

safety inspectors with transfer if they continued to report unsatis-factory, unsafe, or illegal practices at the airline.

• Refusal to allow government safety inspectors to conduct govern-ment-required inspection of the safety records.

• Refusal to accept the fact that they had to meet the safety standards mandated by the federal government. The Culture, Arrogance, Corruption, and Refusal to Act on Known Safety Problems Compounding the misconduct at United Airlines was the miscon-

duct of FAA management that blocked federal inspectors from perform-ing their safety duties, thereby preventing the federal government from meeting its safety responsibilities. Among the problems I and other in-spectors discovered, experienced, and reported, were the following: • Refusal to act on the major safety problems and criminal violations

at United Airlines (and prevalent throughout the FAA at certain of-fices).

• Ordering government aviation safety agents not to report safety problems, including those that resulted in a continuing series of air-line mishaps, including airline disasters.

• Removing official reports from the official files that were made by government safety inspectors, and then giving them to the inspec-tors with a warning that those type of reports made the office look bad when there was a crash. Of course, the function of the office was to take preventative measures so there would not be the crashes. In some instances, the official reports were taken from the files and destroyed.

• Taking various forms of retaliatory acts against inspectors who re-ported the safety problems.

• Safety inspectors attempting to perform their official duties re-ceived poor fitness reports.

• Safety inspectors disturbing office tranquility by reporting the problems were denied promotions and higher salaries.

• Removing inspectors from the competency checks of known weak pilots that were being conducted by the airline’s FAA-approved check airmen. Several Options Available to Safety Inspectors Inspectors exposed to these conditions had several options: they

could try to obtain a transfer to another office; they could look the other way and report no problems; or, the “smart ones,” would “join the team” and report everything to be satisfactory. These were usually the inspectors that had the least experience, the least amount of compe-tency, and the least amount of concern for the resulting carnage. Those


inspectors who tried to perform their legal tasks were accused of not being on the team.

I made many reports of the safety problems and safety violations that I discovered. Many of these reports, which were official govern-ment documents, were either destroyed or given back to me with the warning that these reports were not wanted. The deadly problems then continued, along with the expected federal crashes. Working within the system was not possible, as the culture was throughout the operations section of the FAA, with cooperation of the legal department and the administrator.

United Airlines Had Control Over FAA Safety Inspectors For various reasons, United Airlines had considerable control of the

FAA. They had members of Congress put additional pressure on the FAA when certain safety inspectors reported the safety violations or criminal falsification of safety records.

Primary Problems Were the Deep-Seated Culture Within the FAA and Metastasized Into Other Airlines Although United Airlines had more crashes than any other air-

lines—or more than all the other airlines—crashes were occurring na-tionwide from safety problems that competent safety inspectors had recognized and reported for years. It was difficult to have crashes, with people being killed, cremated alive in some cases, due to the arrogance and misconduct of people in key positions.

I brought the problems to the attention of regional management, with no corrective actions taken—except to take various forms of re-taliatory actions against me. These matters are detailed in the four edi-tions of my book, Unfriendly Skies.

Sampling of How Air Travelers Were Affected A typical example of how air travelers were affected by the corrup-

tion within the FAA is shown in the following not-isolated example. Forty-three people were created alive in a United Airlines crash that occurred at Salt Lake City. Remember, this is only one example of many:

The National Transportation Safety Board’s official report on the cause of the crash and 43 deaths listed three primary causes: • The pilot’s high-sink-rate approach, known to be dangerous, which

caused the Boeing 727 to hit the ground hard and tear off the land-ing gear, resulting in fuel lines being broken and pumping large quantities of fuel outside the aircraft.

• The flight engineer’s poor response, being his failure to shut off fuel valves and fuel pumps after hitting the ground and sliding for half a mile down the runway.


• The poor evacuation of the passengers by the crew. Here are the facts that the political NTSB omitted from its report,

which duplicated other crashes in which the board members falsified the reports by omitting material information: • That very same captain had been reported in an FAA report, written

by me, as having a dangerous high-sink-rate-approach technique, requiring immediate correct training. That training was not done, just as every other recommendation I made went uncorrected. The refusal of FAA management to act on that report was typical of the repeated refusal to act on every other major safety problem that I and other inspectors had reported. Other problems associated with these shortcomings was the denial of legally-required training and competency checks and related falsification of government re-quired reports, plus the low-competency standards of the United Airlines check pilots—that did not meet FAA requirements.

• The poor performance of the flight engineer was due to the serious training and competency check problems at United Airlines which I had reported in numerous reports, one of which was a five-page highly detailed report about the unsatisfactory level of flight engi-neer competency, including comments to me by United captains who agreed with my assessment. FAA management not only re-fused to act on these maters, but also criticized and retaliated against me for making such reports.

• The poor evacuation of the passengers was affected by the failure of United Airlines to provide yearly-required emergency evacua-tion training of the pilots and flight engineer, and then falsifying the government-required records to indicate the training had been provided. I had made several reports of this falsification, and the response given to me by a United Airlines instructor who provided the training. The instructor admitted the failure to perform the training on a yearly basis, saying that he did as he was told. Practice of NTSB Cover-Up Had Tragic Ripple Effects By covering up and falsifying its official report, the NTSB board

members were causing the multiple problems to continue, which had ripple effects in other areas of FAA performance, some of the ripple effect consequences going far beyond what outsiders could recognize.

Deadly Consequences Caused Me to Use Creative Means Blocked at every level from having these deadly matters addressed,

I used the law in a creative manner. I filed papers with the FAA that enabled me to act similar to an independent prosecutor, conducting a four-month hearing. Never in the history of the government’s aviation


safety offices had such an event occurred, where a safety agent became an independent prosecutor to correct the deadly corruption. The hearing was followed by the usual cover-up.

I conduct hearings, obtained testimony of key FAA management, and additional government documents, further proving my charges of deep-seated corruption within the FAA and its relationship to a series of specific airline crashes. The hearing produced 4,000 pages of transcript. The hearing was before an FAA administrative judge who was a lawyer on the FAA administrator’s staff. His continued retention depended upon pleasing his boss: the FAA administrator.

During the FAA Hearing, Three Closely Related Airline Disasters Occurred During these hearings, three other major airline crashes occurred,

two of which were in my immediate area of federal aviation safety re-sponsibilities and which were caused by the very same safety problems that I had reported in writing and which were blocked from being cor-rected by FAA management. Two were of United Airlines aircraft and one was an American Airlines flight approaching the Cincinnati Airport for a night landing. The fact that these crashes continued did not affect the cover-up, which continued.

At the end of the FAA hearing I filed a closing brief that addressed the evidence presented during the hearings. One part of the closing brief was my prediction of what would happen if the hearing officer continued the cover-up of the deadly culture and practices. This section follows:

INITIAL CLOSING BRIEF OF RODNEY F. STICH

FAA E-20G FAA SECTION 1

General This initial closing brief could almost be called, “The Federal

Aviation Administration, A Story of Blood and Guts.” It reflects upon actual conditions identified during this hearing. The price paid for these conditions has been high and gruesome. It is time that a spade is called a spade and actions taken to correct the condi-tions. The use of “rose colored glasses” or other cover-up means are not suitable for the conditions existing herein.

This hearing has illustrated that the Federal Aviation Agency as it pertains to Flight Standards and particularly the Western Region has allowed thousands of safety violations of the regulations to ex-ist in serious safety areas with a major air carrier. These violations of safety regulations, including noncompliance with agency safety


directives, were accomplished with the obvious knowledge, con-doning and cover-up by certain FAA management personnel.

It has shown that massive and continuous violations of the im-portant emergency training regulatory requirements have occurred since approximately March 1962 in clear noncompliance with the intent and the specifics of the Agency regulations and Agency di-rectives.

World’s Worst Air Disaster: DC-8 Crash Into New York City Such violations existed during the hearing (tr 1928) and over

three years after numerous Agency directives were sent to the field stressing the requirement for such compliance to insure passenger survival in otherwise survivable accidents. That the need for such compliance was obvious from actual observance of the cremation of 16 passengers on the FAA “doorsteps” in Denver during a DC-8 tragic accident. That such noncompliance was apparently known and tolerated by various FAA management persons in charge of the program, that they obviously knew of the association between deaths of the passengers on the DC-8 aircraft and that requirement. That such person was too intimately involved in petty and vicious conduct against the reporting inspector to be concerned with the open violation of this major requirement.

The net result is that several thousand crewmembers are now in noncompliance with this regulatory requirement with an obvious safety deficiency existing that will take several years to correct.

It has been shown that there has been a continuous and massive noncompliance with an Agency regulatory requirements ....

The noncompliance with regulatory requirements and Agency directives has existed for approximately six years with numerous Agency exhibits indicating the truth of this condition. It has been shown that serious destructive incidents and hair-raising near-incidents have occurred as a result of this condition that is uncor-rected by FAA management.

It has been shown that Washington instructions specifically di-rected to Chief, Flight Standards Division, have been disregarded (Exhibit 89) and that the Washington instructions and Agency regu-lations are deliberately ignored by certain FAA management. It has been shown that inspectors are actually ordered to participate in a dangerous condition that is in massive noncompliance with agency instructions and regulations. This condition is highly dangerous to the persons on board the aircraft and those on the ground.

It has been shown that there has been massive and continuous noncompliance with regulatory and Agency directives ... condoned


and covered up by numerous FAA management personnel. ... It has been shown that FAA management has stubbornly re-

fused to correct the conditions that caused or allowed the world’s greatest air disaster to occur, the DC-8 crash into the city of New York. It has been shown that FAA management has stubbornly and persistently refused to correct the serious conditions identified by Washington directives that stress the need for immediate corrective actions. This safety deficiency undoubtedly played a major role in this accident. It has been shown that the conditions were actually being encouraged by condoning the air safety violations that en-abled the New York City air disaster to occur.

It has been shown that certain management personnel have been closely associated with numerous tragic air disasters of opera-tion safety deficiencies, that such FAA personnel were responsible for the safety activities and standards of the air carrier, and that such personnel before and after the major air tragedies tolerated or ignored the conditions that were involved in the accidents. It has been shown that they have continually been promoted within the Agency despite such associations and despite their known miscon-duct that reflects gravely upon the ability of the Federal Aviation Agency to properly function.

Retaliation Against Federal Air Safety Inspectors It has been shown that any inspector who identifies and at-

tempts to take corrective actions suffers heavily from the tranquil-ity seeking FAA management. Refusal by FAA management to act on serious safety problems were proven during the four-month-long hearing and stated in the closing brief.

It has been shown that FAA management has repeatedly re-fused to take corrective actions on unsatisfactory company check airmen, unsatisfactory recurrent training programs, noncompliance with emergency training program and regulatory requirements, noncompliance with proficiency check oral requirements, noncom-pliance with landing out of circling approaches as required by regu-lations, serious safety deficiencies and other safety deficiencies.

It has been made obvious that the FAA is unable and unwilling to cope with hidden safety deficiencies as proven by the fact it will not act on obvious and major safety deficiencies.

It has been shown that the Denver DC-8 accident that caused the loss of 18 lives was associated with a defective reverse proce-dure that was reported to FAA management before the accident and was ignored until its involvement with that tragedy.

It has been shown that the Agency’s present management is un-


able and unwilling to correct the deplorable, almost criminal mis-conduct that is occurring within its ranks with tragic prices being paid by the destruction of the required values upon which the Agency must function. Aviation safety will deteriorate with the de-terioration of values in the Agency.

It has been shown that massive disregard of job responsibilities have existed in the Western Region with persons in responsible po-sitions ignoring numerous safety deficiencies. An evaluation will reveal that for a given tour of duty, certain FAA management per-sonnel have not accomplished a single major corrective action for unsafe conditions known or reported to them. It has been shown that FAA management has numerous personnel that are thoroughly incapable of understanding the requirements of safety today who are responsible for making decisions involving important safety re-quirements when they cannot possibly comprehend the magnitude of the problems. The serious misconduct that I have identified is deliberate and dangerous refusal of local FAA management to fol-low specific Washington directives and regulations.

It has been seen that certain FAA management personnel have deliberately refused to correct safety deficiencies, clearly stressed by Washington directives, after the identical condition caused ma-jor air disasters. It has been shown that they remain in position in grade and are continually promoted and/or receive pay increases. It has been seen that the inspectors who recognize the safety deficien-cies and act as Washington instructions clearly specify is discred-ited, denied promotions and considered troublemakers in the “tran-quility seeking” FAA.

Among recent crashes Associated with Previously Reported Se-rious Safety Problems and Safety Violations, and Retaliation Against Reporting Federal Air Safety Inspectors

United Airlines DC-8 crash into New York City. (Due to poor piloting performance, preceded by airline not providing legally re-quired training and competency checks and then falsifying its re-cords; poor competency standards by certain key company check airmen, previously report by FAA inspectors with the results that the inspectors were disciplined and transferred.)

Denver. Poor crew knowledge and defective reverse procedure, resulting in 16 deaths.

Los Angeles. Boeing 727 crash into ocean after takeoff from Los Angeles. Previously reported deficiency arising from absence of backup powered flight instruments and poor knowledge of sys-tems by pilots and flight engineers..

Salt Lake City. Boeing 720 crash with 44 deaths. Due to high


sink rate of captain; poor performance by flight engineer (previ-ously reported by inspector Stich); poor evacuation of passengers by crew (previously reported as not in compliance with the law, conducted only every three years instead of every year, and records falsified). Stich had previously reported the high sink rate of that same pilot and no corrective action taken; Stich had previously re-ported high sink rate of other United Airlines check pilots and in-stead of correcting the problem, Stich was ordered removed from the DC-8 program.

Reporting the Corruption to the Political NTSB Board Before, during, and after the FAA hearing, I reported my charges

and offered supporting evidence to the political board members of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Under law, they had a responsibility to investigate my charges. I discovered that other safety inspectors had already notified them of the serious problems and that they had refused to respond.

The NTSB saw the consequences of the misconduct and their re-fusal to act in two recent air disasters, one of which was a United Air-lines DC-8 that crashed into New York City, the world’s worst air disas-ter at that time, and another DC-8 disaster at Denver six months later. It was these, and other crashes, that caused one segment of the FAA to offer me the assignment to correct the conditions. They warned me of the problems, but assured me that they were right behind me. The first was correct; the second was totally incorrect. I would pay a heavy price, that will go with me to the grave, for having accepted that as-signment and trying to carry it out.

By refusing to act, as they were required to do under law, the NTSB became even guiltier than the perpetrators. The cover-ups, the continuation of the deep-seated problems within the FAA, caused and enabled airline disasters to continue for decades thereafter. Reporting the Criminal Perjury During the FAA Hearing

While I was still employed by the FAA, I reported the federal of-fenses to the FBI and other divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice. Their response was the usual cover-up. They refused to ask me for the supporting evidence. Reporting the Serious Problems to Members of Congress

Because members of Congress had oversight responsibilities over the FAA, I made many of them aware of the FAA problems and the re-lated crashes. I encountered cover-up after cover-up, something that I would experience for many years thereafter as I attempted to report corruption in other areas of government that I and some other former


government agents had discovered as part of our official duties. The General Accountability Office (GSA), which also had respon-

sibilities to investigate, stonewalled me. I would discover that cover-ups and refusal to address serious problems were the standard practice of people in government offices, something that affects national issues to this day.

Eventually I came to the conclusion that no matter how grave the misconduct in high-level government positions, in government offices, no matter how much harm was being inflicted, it was virtually impossi-ble to get people in government to perform their responsibilities.

Part of the problems for the stonewalling was the great number of deaths associated with the misconduct.

Leaving Government Service A combination of factors caused me to resign from government ser-

vice. For one, I refused to work under the corrupt conditions that had such a deadly effect. Most FAA inspectors did not want to give up the government position and security, especially at middle age where ob-taining another position would be difficult.

I did have some real estate to use as a base. None of it was produc-ing any cash flow, but I could devote attention to it and work to im-prove the property and the income. The death of the manager of apart-ments that I had in Concord, California, motivated me to do what I had been contemplating, resigning from the FAA.

Continuing Culture and Continuing Crashes The crashes due to the unsafe practices continued to occur, at

United Airlines and elsewhere. While building up my real estate in-vestments I simultaneously continued to send letters to members of Congress and to the media offering to provide evidence of the deep-seated problems. None accepted.

I decided to use other means. Federal statutes provide certain op-portunities and certain responsibilities relating to federal crimes. The federal crime reporting statute requires that anyone who knows of a federal crime must promptly report it to a federal judge, or other federal officer. And if he or she doesn’t, that person is guilty of the crime of cover-up, or in legal terms, misprision of a felony.

Another federal statute provides any citizen the right to file a fed-eral action seeking an order to force a federal official to comply with the law and cease his or her unlawful conduct.

Creative Use of Federal Law to Report Corruption Related to a Continuing Series of Fatal Airline Disasters In the early 1980s, I filed several federal actions under these stat-

utes in the U.S. district courts at San Francisco, against the FAA and NTSB. The action listing the FAA as the defendant attempted to report


federal crimes that I had documented, associated with several major airline disasters that I had discovered while a federal agent.

The second action, against the NTSB, sought to obtain an order requiring the FAA to receive my evidence of material information related to the crash of a PSA airliner into San Diego. That was the world’s worst air disaster, taking the record held by the United Airlines DC-8 that crashed into New York City—the program for which I had the primary hands-on safety responsibility.

In the first action, district court judges Robert Schnacke and then appellate court judges acknowledged the gravity of my charges. But after Justice Department lawyers moved to prevent me from making the reports, the federal judges then held that it was the responsibility of Congress to investigate my charges.

It was the responsibility of Congress to investigate (as it was the FBI and other Justice Department lawyers). However, I wasn’t expect-ing federal judges to investigate; I was merely meeting my legal duty to report the federal crimes, which would have made a record and which would have required federal judges to pass the information on to the proper government office. It was a congressional responsibility to take action, and I stated to the judges that every member of Congress to whom I sought to provide the evidence refused to receive it.

It was the judge’s responsibility—as clearly stated by Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, to receive information on a federal crime as part of their administrative (not judicial) duties. By blocking me from making the reports, they were obstructing justice, and their actions enabled to con-tinue the misconduct and the closely related preventable airline disas-ters.

The federal judges also had a clear responsibility to receive my evi-dence to determine whether to issue an order, as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1361, requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and to halt unlawful conduct.

Contradictory Positions by U.S. Attorney in San Francisco In the lawsuit against the NTSB, filed in San Francisco, Assistant

U.S. Attorney George Stoll called me several days after I filed the pa-pers, stating that he was recommending to his superiors in Washington that they support my action. What Stoll didn’t know was that Justice Department people in Washington had been covering up for these mat-ters ever since I first reported them while I was an agent in the Federal Aviation Administration.

Complicity of Supreme Court Justices I filed “appeals” with the U.S. Supreme Court, called petitions for

writ of certiorari. These filings made the Justices aware of the obstruc-


tion of justice by federal judges over whom they had supervisory re-sponsibilities. The justices also had a responsibility under the federal crime reporting statute to receive the information of federal crimes—especially since these affected major national issues, and involved mat-ters of life and death. That was the beginning of years of cover-ups by Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, which would have ripples in many other areas and in various forms of catastrophic consequences.

Using Real Estate Assets to Circumvent the Cover-ups I then used my assets to fund other activities seeking to expose

these matters. I wrote and published the first in a series of books in 1978, seeking to make this information available to the public. I had the expectation that there would be sufficient numbers of people outraged by these matters—especially the next of kin in any of the airline disas-ters that could have been prevented. That would be another disap-pointment.

The publication of one of the first expose books at that time en-abled me to appear as a guest and expert on the first of over 3,000 radio and television shows. The first of these shows focused on the miscon-duct in government offices and the relationship to preventable airline crashes. Later shows would expose the corruption in other government offices and government operations.

In the second edition of Unfriendly Skies, which came out in 1981, I named the federal judges who blocked the reporting of these matters and identified the consequences of their cover-ups and obstruction of justice. By exposing federal judges, there would start a string of events that revealed corruption in other areas of government and affecting other national issues.

I started traveling to distant cities to appear on hundreds of radio and television shows, using my twin-engine aircraft. The combination of the books and my appearances threatened to expose people directly involved in the corrupt activities, and those involved in cover-ups.

Sampling of Aviation Crashes and Disasters Caused by Safety Problems Known to FAA People This culture in the government’s aviation safety offices, primarily

the FAA, of refusing to act on known safety problems covers a span of many decades, Highlights of this misconduct, taken from my multiple editions of Unfriendly Skies, have been given in these pages. A quick thumbnail sampling of the crashes resulting in great human tragedies follows: • Hijackings. Worldwide airliner hijackings have been occurring for

the past 50 years, slowly becoming more brutal with the passage of time. There were known simple and inexpensive basic measures that could have been taken and put into place, overnight, which I


and other federal safety inspectors had reported. The basic steps in-cluded: o Keep the cockpit doors locked during the entire period that pas-

sengers are on the aircraft. o Remove the cockpit door keys from the flight attendants.

Almost any male can physically overpower a female flight attendant and gain possession of the keys, allowing hijackers to enter the cockpit. It is highly probable that the terrorists on each of the four airliners on 9/11 obtained the cockpit door keys from the cabin flight attendants. If a passenger attempted to break down the cockpit door, the average pilot could easily hinder that attempt by placing the aircraft in an unusual atti-tude. Competent FAA administrator and management could have easily recognized this preventative measure—after 50 years of doing nothing—especially after receiving repeated re-ports that terrorists were planning to hijack U.S. airliners.

o Video cameras in the cabin, allowing pilots to check possible cabin disturbance on a screen in the cockpit area.

o Bar carry-on baggage larger than a toilet kit or laptop com-puter. Large baggage permits hiding explosives and weapons and makes such detection difficult and unreliable.

• United Airlines DC-8 crash into New York City, the world worst air disaster at that time, to be followed by another world worst aviation disaster in that city occurring on September 11, 2001. Both crashes were preceded by known safety problems reported by fed-eral air safety inspectors, who also reported the needed preventative measures.

• United Airlines DC-8 crash at Denver, with many people being cremated alive. This crash arose from the same problems as I and other inspectors reported.

• United Airlines Boeing 727 crash at Salt Lake City. Most classic textbook example of a preventable airline crash, preventable deaths, and documented arrogance and corruption of people in key government safety positions.

• United Airlines Boeing 727 crash at Los Angeles. Over 100 deaths. The cause was the illegal dispatching of a three-engine aircraft with one generator inoperative; the refusal of United Airlines to have a backup powered attitude indicator in the event of total electrical failure (that frequently occurred), and the unsatisfactory training of flight engineers. I had reported the absence of a backup powered at-titude indicator as extremely dangerous; reported the flight engi-


neer program as a farce, and widespread violation of federal air safety requirements by certain people at United Airlines.

• United Airlines DC-8 crash into outskirts of Portland, Oregon. Caused by the crew’s poor understanding of a basic landing gear system. Over a dozen people killed.

• Numerous other crashes of United Airlines aircraft due to the air safety problems and corruption at United Airlines and within the Federal Aviation Administration, detailed in the third and subse-quent editions of Unfriendly Skies.

• DC-10 crashes, one of which killed several hundred people, were preceded by numerous reports of major design problems relating to cargo doors, week flooring, and absence of backup for the hydrau-lic powered flight controls. Several disasters occurred involving DC-10s, one of which killed over 400 people as it dove into the ground at over 350 miles per hour.

• Aircraft descending into the ground due to lack of altitude aware-ness. I reported that problem, along with preventative measures. FAA management ordered me to halt giving information to the air-lines on this matter. No action was taken by FAA management, de-spite several air disasters occurring before, during, and after these reports.

• High altitude jet upsets. In the early days of the jets, high-altitude jet upsets occurred, which I investigated and recommended preven-tative measures, which Flying Tigers later adopted. FAA manage-ment ordered me to stop providing this information to the airlines and airline pilots.

• Alaska Airlines crash into Pacific Ocean due to worn-out jackscrew assembly that controlled the position of the horizontal stabilizer. FAA principal operations inspector Mary Diefenderfer had repeat-edly reported serious maintenance problems at the airline, for which FAA management blocked corrective actions, and then re-taliated against her, causing her to resign her government position.

• Other examples can be found in my Unfriendly Skies.. Summary examples of actions taken by FAA Management that prevented corrective measures:

• FAA managers telling federal air safety inspectors not to report unsafe or illegal matters (as it would make the FAA managers look bad when accidents occur).

• FAA managers returning official reports of air safety problems to the reporting inspectors.

• FAA managers removing and destroying official reports on major air safety problems and violations involving politically powerful


airlines or airlines with whom they were seeking employment. (Re-volving door syndrome)

• FAA managers retaliating against federal air safety inspectors who either continued to make reports of air safety problems or who took the authorized and legally required corrective actions. The retalia-tion includes unsatisfactory performance reports; denial of promo-tions; denial of additional training seminars; assignment to undesir-able duties.

• Incompetent FAA managers making poor performance reports of inspectors reporting safety problems, and excellent fitness reports for inspectors who falsified their reports that indicated no safety problems.

• Promotion of inspectors who covered up for safety problems, in place of inspectors who honestly reported the problems responsible for continuing airline disasters.


United Airlines DC-8 crash into New York City

The culture that caused and enabled that crash to occur would con-tinue for decades, with ripple effects that no one recognized, or cared to admit.


CHAPTER TWO

Years of Judicial and Media Cover-Ups

etween 1979 and 1982 I had used two different federal statutes to circumvent the cover-ups I had encountered, seeking to force federal judges to perform their judicial duties and duty under

the federal crime report statute. As other government agents heard about my efforts through the first two editions of Unfriendly Skies and the many radio and television appearances, in the mid-1980s I started hearing from agents of the FBI, CIA, DEA, Customs, and other gov-ernment agencies. They provided me with information and documenta-tion on other forms of corruption that they either discovered or in which they had been involved. I thought I had uncovered serious mis-conduct, which was deadly for many people, but what they revealed to me was criminality on a much higher plane, in other government of-fices, and in covert government operations.

Again Exercising My Responsibility under 18 U.S.C. § 4 Under the federal crime reporting statute, I elected to report these

criminal activities to a federal judge, to members of congress, to De-partment of Justice people. The same prior stonewalling and cover-ups continued. It was the standard response to information of high-level criminality.

In 1986 I filed papers in the U.S. district courts at Sacramento, California, requesting that my sources and I be allowed to testify and present evidence of the federal criminal activities that we had discov-ered in our professional and official positions.

Continuation of Judicial Cover-ups The first filing, in the U.S. district court at Sacramento, was as-

signed to Judge Milton Schwartz. During the first court hearing, Schwartz admitted the seriousness of my charges, and stated that he was giving me time to obtain a lawyer.

B


The federal crime reporting statute does not require a person who knows of a federal crime to obtain—at great expense—a lawyer to pre-sent information that only his client has, of federal crimes involving key people in federal government.

Further, virtually no lawyer would take a case in which he would be reporting federal crimes that involved not only high federal officials, but involved federal judges who had earlier covered up and blocked reports, making them complicit in the criminal acts and in the conse-quences.

Sudden Reversal of Position A week later, without the required notice, Judge Schwartz issued an

order dismissing my filing, thereby blocking me from reporting the criminal activities. His order compounded the obstruction of justice and due process violations by forever barring me from filing any papers in any federal court relating to the matters that I stated in my filing.

Due process federal requirements clearly bar federal judges from dismissing an action without giving the party notice; require recogniz-ing as true, at that stage of the pleading, every statement made in the filing, and if any statement raised a federal cause of action, the federal judge is expected to perform his duty and provide a federal court fo-rum. That is what is expected; but that is not what happened.

Among the people Schwartz was protecting were federal judges who were already shown in judicial records as obstructing justice.

I filed appeals, requiring federal judges to examine my filing and, in accordance with federal due process requirements—plus the re-quirements of Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 requiring the judge to receive the in-formation of federal crimes—the appellate judges were required to re-verse the dismissal. Instead, they joined the cover-up, enlarging the number of people that were in one way or another complicit in criminal activities that enabled to continue areas of great harm to major national interests.

Federal judges were now openly hostile to my attempts to report corruption in key government offices. Federal judges refused to allow me to proceed, dismissed every federal filing almost as soon as they were filed. Two of the federal judges entered unlawful and unconstitu-tional orders barring me for the remainder of my life from accessing federal courts.

October Surprise and Drug Smuggling As other information was provided concerning criminal activities in

what was known as October Surprise, and later, CIA involvement in drug smuggling, I again exercised my duty, and my right as a citizen, and attempted to report these matters to a federal judge through a fed-

Years of Judicial and Media Cover-Ups 21

eral court filing. The same judges who entered the orders terminating my right to

federal court then, with the assistance of federal prosecutors, charged me with criminal contempt of court for filing papers in federal court. They sought to have me imprisoned for two years, denied me a jury trial and at the age of 67, sentenced me to six months in federal prison. From 1987 to 1995, I was constantly under charges of criminal con-tempt of court or actually in prison.

Sentenced to Federal Prison for Attempting to Report Criminal Activities With Prior, Present, and Future Catastrophic Consequences Without addressing the underlying corruption and cover-ups, to

sentence a former federal agent to prison for attempting to report crimi-nal activities that were continuing to gravely affect major national in-terests, was a major high-level crime by itself. Some years later, these same problems that I sought to report in the government’s aviation safety offices—and to a lesser extent in the FBI and CIA--would make possible catastrophic events on September 11, 2001. This relationship was a textbook example of the “butterfly effect.”

Documented Judicial Crimes Actions taken to block reporting of criminal activities are felonies

under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, and 4. Retaliation against a former fed-eral agent or witness for seeking to report federal crimes are felonies under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 35, 111, 153, 241, 242, 245(b)(1)(B), 246, 371, 1341, 1343, 1503, 1505, 1512, 1513(b), 1515(a).

Legal Fraternity Heavily Involved in Cover-ups In 1982, shortly after the second edition of Unfriendly Skies was

published—that exposed the complicity of federal judges—a scheme was concocted using the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Francisco to halt my exposure activities. The details of this scheme are in the latest edition of Unfriendly Skies.

Role Played by Members of Congress I first contacted members of Congress while I held federal air

safety responsibilities during the time when airline crashes were occur-ring in my areas of responsibilities. I sought to provide evidence of misconduct that was in their area of oversight responsibilities. That was the start of decades of cover-ups by members of congress that I and other former government agents experienced. That is also an area that continues to subvert major national interests.

Once the congressional cover-ups started, followed by the prevent-able crashes, it became necessary to continue the cover-up to protect the key players in the system. This culture in Congress would later in-clude other areas of corruption that had and continue to inflict great


harm upon vital national interests. I was offering to provide my testi-mony and government documents, and offering the testimony of other government agents.

Other Federal Aviation Safety Inspectors Had Been Blocked From Performing Their Aviation Safety Duties For years I have heard from other safety agents in the FAA who re-

ported some form of the same problems that I discovered. One of the FAA agents who contacted me was the principal operations inspector at Alaska Airlines: Mary Rose Diefenderfer. She reported the problem of FAA management blocking her from performing her safety duties when she sought to report and act on major maintenance problems at Alaska Airlines.

Mary Rose had worked for the FAA for 12 years until she was forced to quit when FAA management repeatedly harassed her in re-taliation for her reports on air safety problems. Prior to going with the FAA she was an airline pilot.

The blocked actions on maintenance problems had a fatal conse-quence. Due to maintenance problems, Alaska Airlines experienced a failure of the jackscrew that controls the horizontal stabilizer, causing it to fail and put the DC-9 into a steep nose-down position, resulting in the aircraft crashing into the Pacific Ocean off the coast of California with the loss of 88 lives. But stories like that are “old hat.” I describe a number of similar fatal disasters along a similar line.

The following are extracts from documents that Mary Rose Diefenderfer wrote, including a 24-page statement to the NTSB to use in their investigation of Alaska airlines Flight 2611:

I was forced to reveal government corruption involving selec-tive safety oversight of this airline, and safety problems ignored by FAA management. My commitment to public safety resulted in my being forced out of the FAA.

During a four-year period my team of inspectors and I identi-fied many safety infractions at our assigned airline, ranging from falsification of records and inadequate training, to unsafe flight procedures and failure to document mechanical discrepancies. Time, observation, and responsible investigation clearly identified an increasing negative safety trend, one that indicated a potential airline disaster if not aggressively corrected. Everybody up to and including the FAA Administrator was provided with numerous re-ports detailing the problems we identified.

When these facts and the trends were reported within the agency, the FAA management disregarded the accident potential, choosing to react instead to the airline reports of “problem” inspec-


tors. We were reported as troublemakers. FAA management vowed to “fix” the inspectors. Instead of addressing the safety problems, they labeled us “disgruntled” employees. Eventually the FAA re-moved three inspectors, including myself, from oversight of Alas-kan Airlines, and replaced us with less “energetic” employees. These employees understood that career survival required silence about the major safety issues.

After finding safety problems, I was told I was not a “team player,” I was a “problem,” and I “caused too much work.” I was told I could not make safety reports, a mandate under federal law. Politics overrules safety. Threats If She Did Not Approve Eliminating Basic Safety Requirement Mary Rose described a certain FAA management official who held

safety oversight responsibilities for Alaskan Airlines who also had an employment contract with the airline. (Typical revolving door syn-drome in government offices!) She described Alaskan Airlines man-agement personnel and former FAA management officials demanding her to approve passenger flights over vast stretches of ocean in Alaska without life rafts, to where passenger survival in case of aircraft ditch-ing would be out of the question. She described the threats she received if she did not approve the reduction in safety equipment.

Reporting Falsified Safety Records Mary Rose described FAA management attacks upon her when she

reported falsification of training records, falsification of maintenance records, non-compliance with mandatory and important federal air safety requirements, among other problems. She described repeated instances of FAA management retaliation against federal air safety in-spectors who reported safety problems. She described being told she was “not on the team,” and increasing the workload of the office and FAA management, by reporting the safety problems. She described the practice of Alaskan Airlines officials complaining to FAA management about FAA inspectors, a practice encouraged by FAA management, showing the airline that it could ignore federal air safety requirements.

She reported FAA management repeatedly telling her and other in-spectors that Alaskan Airlines was the FAA’s customer and to give them what they wanted, meaning to ignore federal air safety requirements.

She described the complete lack of support by FAA management personnel for FAA inspectors, preventing the federal government from meeting its air safety responsibilities. She described the practice of Alaskan Airlines pilots routinely descending below instrument ap-proach minimums at Dutch Harbor in Alaska, which endangered the


flights and was the cause of many aviation crashes. (A friend of mine, Ace Sergeant, was killed during an instrument approach to Anchorage when he descended too low.)

Alaskan Airlines Disaster Followed This Misconduct All of these problems were reported before 88 people died in the

Alaskan Airlines crash off the coast of California. The primary cause for those 88 deaths was an excessive wear on the jackscrew that posi-tioned the horizontal stabilizer. The contributing causes were the lax practices at Alaskan Airlines and the FAA management that aided and abetted these practices and blocked government safety agents from car-rying out the air safety responsibilities of the federal government.

These Corrupt Acts Duplicated Many Times in my Area The endemic problems that she found in the Northwestern Region

of the FAA were similar to what I discovered in the Western Region, although there were many more crashes associated with what I encoun-tered. What Mary Rose found during her professional and official du-ties, I found numerous times. Where the consequence at Alaskan Air-lines was one fatal disaster, there were multiple air disasters from the conditions that I discovered.

Similar Complaints from FAA Security Chief A short but significant comment appeared in the June 2002 issue of

Business and Commercial Aviation by Billie Vincent, a former FAA chief of security, as excerpted from Playboy:

It’s a sick organization, and you survive in that environment by not making any waves. The mediocre survive. They go along to get along. Compounding the Deadly Culture Adding to the deadly culture problems in the FAA was the place-

ment of politically correct people in key management positions who lacked experience and competency for the position. These incompetent people are placed in key positions on the basis of getting votes from a particular section of the electorate, cronyism, and political contribu-tions.

Exposing this practice caused problems for Richard Russell, an old timer in the FAA. He wrote about this problem in a media article and then was subjected to so much harassment by FAA management that he took early retirement. In a letter to me in January 2002 he wrote, “Here are excerpts of my letter to several of my elected officials, Senators and Congressmen, in 1996. Is it no wonder “we” are in the predicament that we are in now?” The letter follows:

I write to you because you have demonstrated your interest in


aviation safety and the improvement of same for the traveling pub-lic. However, there remains much to be done, as there are too many unqualified and inept individuals in policy and regulatory manage-ment positions with the FAA. That MUST change if we are to have the best and safest air transportation system in the free world.

Having had over 40 years of “hands on” aviation experience, including a tour at 800 Independence Avenue [Washington], I be-lieve I am qualified to speak with some authority. One cannot con-tinue to try and make chicken salad out of chicken droppings! To continue to perpetuate the fraud on America known as diversity and affirmative action is degrading aviation safety at an alarming rate!

The Director of the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City seems proud that her degree in fashion design qualifies her to oversee and attempt to manage all logistics activi-ties, flight inspection and training for the FAA. She previously held various clerical and administrative positions more commensurate with her background, which DOES NOT include any real world aviation experience such as one might gain as a pilot, mechanic, or airline manager. She can hardly spell airline let alone understand the criteria for qualification as a pilot or mechanic! Her assistant is an engineer, NOT aeronautical, and has climbed the ladder of “suc-cess” in the FAA bureaucracy due to the circles one travels rather than becoming the best qualified to manage safety activities.

The government has perpetuated fraud upon the American pub-lic through the diversity efforts to move women and minorities up-ward into senior management positions these past 10 years! It is a travesty that one should have to witness better qualified and experi-enced individuals fall by the wayside and be discriminated against because “they” are truly the best qualified and trained and in most instances better educated. Broderick once made the statement to the gathered FSDO managers of the FAA (1991) that look around you and in less than 4 years this group will be 50 percent female or mi-norities, not that 50 percent of this group will exhibit the best quali-fications we can find to assume management positions to ensure the highest level of safety for the traveling public.

The government continues to place inept, unqualified individu-als in positions of great responsibility to satisfy marks on the bark rather than efficient and safety while maintaining integrity and credibility with the American public.

How true! These problems are endemic throughout government and

a reflection on the culture in the United States that contributes to the unrecognized deterioration of the United States as a nation. Without


ever learning, the public repeatedly pays for it, and on a particular fate-ful day on September 11, 2001, they really paid for it! But this goes on throughout government. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, many died, and thousands suffered undue hardship because of the incompetence at the head of Homeland Security and FEMA, a tradition in the United States that I had witnessed since before the Japanese attack upon Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

An example of many other instances of this type of decay is found in the affidavit prepared by former U.S. Customs Service agent Darlene Fitzgerald-Catalan on September 18, 2001. Excerpts from her affidavit follows:

In October 1999, I resigned from the U.S. Customs Service, af-ter having been subjected to retaliation, intimidation, threats, and harassment on an enormous scale. This abusive treatment was the result of becoming a witness … as well as being a whistleblower to corruption I identified. I left only because I honestly felt that I had no choice, and refused to work for people in this agency that were worse than the people I had put in jail.

It is important to note that prior to my whistle blowing activi-ties I had completed over nine years of excellent service with U.S. Customs. Additionally, I was an honorably discharged, decorated veteran (Captain) with the U.S. Army Military Police Corps.

The remainder of her six-page affidavit described how certain

management officials in U.S. Customs repeatedly blocked the inspec-tion of rail cars from Mexico suspected of carrying drugs, and which had the potential for smuggling nuclear or other material into the United States.

Thinking Back to My Earliest Efforts to Expose Corruption As crashes continued to occur in my immediate area of federal air

safety responsibilities, and after I had been forcibly transferred away from the airline aviation safety responsibilities, and transferred to Okla-homa City, I continued my efforts to make others aware of these matters.

While working at the aeronautical center I met a former FAA law-yer with whom I had worked in the Los Angeles area; John Graziano. He was now legal counsel in charge of Security and Compliance for the FAA training center. He knew of the internal FAA problems and my attempts to expose them. During our first conversation Graziano stated, “Rod, please, don’t do anything here until I can get away; I don’t want to get involved.”


“The main victims are our own citizens.” Senator Gaylord Nelson stated in a Congressional speech: There is an alarming trend in this country toward the use of police-state tactics ... assurances [from Government agencies] it now ap-pears, were lies ... The worst thing about all of these tactics is that the main victims are our own citizens.”

Nelson couldn’t be bothered when I advised him of corruption in

the air safety field and the continuing deaths resulting from it. Unprecedented Lying in Government— But This Was Nothing Compared to What Followed “Crisis of Confidence Rocks Capital; Nobody Knows who’s Telling

the Truth,” captioned a James Reston column in the mid-1960s. De-scribing the housecleaning needed in Congress, the National Observer stated:

In Paris, Le Monde editorialized that not a day passes any more but that the most moderate American press catches the President or his collaborators in the flagrant act of lying.

The lying they were addressing was junior league compared to

what it had become by the time this book was written. Arrogance of Those in Government Offices Conducting hearings into government misconduct, Senator Sam

Ervin stated, “In all of our investigations, I have never seen anything to equal the outrage and indignation from government employees, their families and their friends.” Senator Ervin, a former Supreme Court judge in his home state, was an astute investigator, especially of crimi-nal misconduct. He understood the evidence I presented to him, but he refused to act on it.

Writing of government’s brutality toward its own employees, re-flecting its attitude toward the public, Joseph Yount wrote in a Wash-ington Star article:

One of the most insidious factors [within government] of invol-untary retirements is that many of them are based on mental dis-ability charges ... Employees charge that they have been involun-tarily removed through this procedure ... because they dared criti-cize the way things were being run in their office. Others are threatened with such actions if they don’t stay in line.

In one instance, Senator John Williams rushed to the rescue of a

government employee who refused to remain quiet when the Billie Sol Estes scandal in the mid-1960s threatened to implicate President John-son and other government officials. Senator Williams said:


She was railroaded to a mental institution because she knew too much” about the Estes scandal; she was “guilty of nothing other than refusing to cooperate in covering up the corruption.

Robert Kennedy held the post of Attorney General while his De-

partment of Justice legal goons dragged this woman to a mental institu-tion.

“Vast powers of the government...” In The Pentagon, author Clark Mollenhoff spoke of the political

maneuvering and coercion by government, of how their threat to close key military bases, awarding or denying multi-million dollar contracts, can impose the will of Government on industry and others. He ex-plained, “the vast powers of the government to keep powerful con-gressmen in line and to keep others from complaining” kept many from exposing corruption of federal officials.

Initial Obstruction of Justice By Justice Department personnel My initial reports of federal crimes in high government offices oc-

curred while I was still a federal agent, and involved the U.S. Attorney in Denver where the criminal acts during the FAA hearing occurred. He stonewalled me. After I changed my residence to Oklahoma, I filed a complaint with the U.S. Attorney in Oklahoma City, describing the criminal acts occurring in Denver, identifying myself as a government employee, and briefly described the specific federal crimes, including the association with several recent airline disasters occurring in my area of government aviation safety responsibilities. The stonewalling con-tinued, as he responded:

The matter you complained of occurred in Denver, it seems unlikely that any action by this office would be appropriate. However, we are double-checking our own judgment on this with our superiors.

A private citizen does not have to run to the far corners of the coun-try to report federal crimes. The local U.S. Attorney was responsible for making the initial investigation and then coordinating it with the U.S. Attorney at Denver. Apparently, Justice Department officials in Wash-ington were directing the stonewalling, resulting in phony excuses by local U.S. attorneys and FBI agents. When I received no reply, I wrote again:

It is now almost five weeks since I submitted to your office charges of criminal acts gravely involved in air carrier safety. Is it possible that your office has no interest in this serious matter involving the public’s welfare. I think we both realize the government scandal


that would be uncovered if the material that you have is actually true. No response was ever received. A month later I wrote again, ex-

plaining the urgency of the matter and stating that irregularities “would have a very important effect upon aviation safety, and delay can have a very adverse effect.” U.S. Attorney Lawrence Henry replied:

We cannot see that this office has any jurisdiction whatsoever in the matter, and accordingly, are taking no action.

The U.S. Attorney in Oklahoma City held that it was Denver’s re-

sponsibility. Denver held they had no responsibility. I started out with an air disaster scandal, and now I had the scandal of widespread felony obstruction of justice to complicate the initial criminal activities. An-gered, I wrote back:

Your letter almost takes on the guise of a ploy to sidetrack your im-portant responsibilities to the public in this matter that is taking the lives of airline passengers ... I suggest you correlate your letters with Oklahoma City as the United States attorney [at Oklahoma City] stated it was in your area [of responsibility]. Duty to Investigate and Prosecute Responsibility to act is shown in part by Public Law 89-554, which

states: Each United States attorney, within his district, shall [investigate and] prosecute for all offenses against the United States.” Addi-tional responsibilities are stated, and here we have a conflict: “De-fend for the Government, all civil actions, suits or proceeding in which the United States is concerned.

The U.S. Attorney, like the Attorney General, is a political ap-

pointee, and although responsible for enforcing federal law, he is part of a vast political machine that routinely misuses the powers of the fed-eral government to cover up for criminal activities in government of-fices and covert government operations.

I then wrote to the office of the U.S. Attorney in Washington, ad-dressing it to Alfred Hantman, Chief of the Criminal Division. He wrote back:

Please be advised that your letter of September 14, 1966, directed to the United States attorney in this jurisdiction, and relative to cer-tain allegations of perjury committed by unidentified persons in connection with a Government safety hearing, has been referred to the Department of Justice for its consideration.


At that time I had not provided the Justice Department with any evidence. A valid investigation, if they did not already know of the crimes, required that I am contacted and a thorough examination made of the evidence in my possession, along with a detailed explanation of its significance.

I wrote again on October 9th, and then on October 30th, explaining to the Department of Justice the gravity of the matter, and offering to provide evidence. I described additional fatal crashes that occurred af-ter I made my initial charges to the Justice Department. Here I was, a government safety investigator, holding the responsibility to make such determinations, with evidence of a national crime defrauding the United States, resulting in continuing deaths, and the Justice Depart-ment, responsible to investigate and prosecute the crimes, refused to look at my evidence. Getting no answers from the Department of Jus-tice, I sent a certified letter to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, stating in part:

Possibly I should have made this request sooner [for an FBI investigation of my allegations] but I had expected other govern-ment agencies to act, who are now involved in the crime them-selves. I also was not completely aware of the responsibilities spe-cifically delegated to your bureau until analyzing the Government Organization Manual, Executive Order 10450 and other material.

I am requesting an investigation into the crimes of perjury, criminal misconduct, by government personnel, especially as it pre-ceded the tragic and expected cremation of 43 passengers at Salt Lake City from ... forcibly continued unsafe and unlawful con-ditions. Unfortunately, we are beyond the point of euphemistic platitudes, and immediate corrective actions, not whitewash, is re-quired. The affront upon the public’s welfare cannot continue ... I really think that at least one government agency should finally re-spond to this serious condition and its responsibilities before the public is made aware of the crime. Naturally, I am the one person with the information of the crime. May I have an acknowledgement from your bureau of this letter and of its intentions, Mr. Hoover?

Hantman then replied:

I feel certain that the Department of Justice will take whatever ac-tion may be necessary in connection with the information you have heretofore furnished.

Five months later, the Justice Department still had not contacted me

for the details of my serious charges. I wondered about the effective-


ness of the Justice Department when addressing threats as posed by terrorists and other criminals.

“Why Were the Crimes Committed?” Finally, FBI agent Don Sloatt made a brief visit to me at my Okla-

homa City home. He explained that the purpose of his call was to make an initial contact to determine the general nature of my allegations. He stated that it wasn’t an investigative or fact-finding visit. He didn’t look at my evidence, or go into any specifics.

His visit was clearly to discourage me from pursuing my exposure activities. Sloatt stated that the FBI could not take action unless they knew the reason for the crimes. “This is asinine,” I retorted. “Giving the reason for the crime, much less proving it, would be virtually im-possible. This requires looking into a person’s inner thought processes.” I added: “Your position is synonymous to a policeman standing indif-ferent as a crime is committed because he doesn’t know the reason for the attack!”

Not one of the Federal criminal laws provides that criminal acts go unpunished because the reason for the crime is unknown. On the con-trary, federal statutes and case law make it clear that the reason for the crimes being committed is immaterial.

“The Accident Rate Was Not Very High,” said the FBI Agent Sloatt then tried to justify his refusal to investigate on the basis that

the accident rate wasn’t very high. I hardly think Sloatt was an expert or authority on air safety. I replied, “The facts speak otherwise. Be-sides, that has nothing to do with the prosecution of the criminal acts.” If the number of holdups, or rapes, is not high in a particular commu-nity, that doesn’t excuse police from acting on the crimes that have been committed.

Request for a Justice Department Investigation Sloatt recognized that I wasn’t buying his position. He then stated

before leaving: “This appears to be a matter for our fraud division to investigate. I’ll recommend that the Justice Department conduct further investigations.”

Before leaving, Sloatt asked me to submit a letter outlining the general allegations in more detail, which I did. The silent treatment continued. I wrote directly to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, stating in part:

My previous letter of October 31st made reference to what I con-sidered to be a serious crime within government that is ... creating aviation chaos with one example being the intimate association with the Salt Lake City crash of November 11, 1965. To this date I have not been contacted for the details and evidence that I possess except for a brief discussion with a local FBI agent who of course


wasn’t equipped for conducting the intensive investigation ... the public is getting the short end of this failure to investigate. Standard Government Double Talk Hoover never responded. In a later speech, Hoover later said: “The

best way to solve the crime problem is by swift detection, prompt prosecution and sure punishment.” After he made that statement, and while still employed by the FAA, I again sent a certified letter to the FBI director:

To this date the Federal Bureau of Investigation has never once contacted me for the specifics of the alleged crime that I brought to its attention, or looked over any of my myriad evidence, facts, and other material pertaining to my allegations.

If the crime actually exists, and it certainly does, then we have the added problem of the felony of harboring the crime which would be attached to anyone knowing of it and refusing to bring it to immediate justice. These letters were written while I was a federal employee. If my

charges were not true, efforts could have been made to discharge me for making bogus claims.

FBI Obstruction of Justice Years later it would be revealed that Hoover was covering up for

FBI special agents in Boston protecting criminals involved in system-atic murders, including the murders of government informants whose names were given to crime figures by FBI agents.

I had been naive, thinking that all I really had to do was present evidence of the FAA corruption, the related deaths, and that the Justice Department would swing into action. What especially bothered me was that they knew the serious FAA corruption would continue if a full-blown exposure did not occur.

I seemingly ran out of Federal agencies to which I could appeal. I also hadn’t done well with the legislative branch, but I kept trying. I contacted Representative Jerome Waldie and explained the problem to him. (I was formerly a resident of California and on that basis sought Waldie’s help.) I described the FBI cover-up and requested that Waldie obtain an explanation from Hoover, and this was done

Hoover’s Confidential Reply Hoover’s reply to Waldie’s letter asked that Waldie keep it confi-

dential. Hoover stated he his letter that the FBI had contacted me and conducted an interview with me. Hoover’s letter to Waldie stated:

I have received your letter of February 10th, and copies of official


communications written by Mr. Rodney F. Stich. However, I did not receive the letter sent to you by this individual. In response to your inquiry and for your confidential information, Mr. Stich has been interviewed by a representative of this Bureau. Mr. Stich has also corresponded with this Bureau, and based upon the data he has set forth there has been no violation of Federal law coming within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI.

FBI Director Was Lying! The FBI never asked for my evidence, and they never received any.

The FBI received my serious allegations, and never pursued the matter any further. Hoover lied when he stated that the FBI contacted me, and looked at my evidence. Under these conditions, it is understandable that Hoover requested his letter to Waldie remain confidential. But by error or otherwise, Waldie sent me a copy.

Who’s Lying: Hoover, or Me? I replied to Waldie’s letter, describing the discrepancies in Hoover’s

letter, and asked that Waldie pursue the contradiction that had serious implications. Waldie replied:

Although I have read and re-read your letters of March 12th and March 14th, I still cannot overcome the hurdle of J. Edgar Hoo-ver’s letter to me of February 27th. The only way that I will feel free to precede on this matter is to assume that Mr. Hoover is mis-informing me as to the fact that his agency has examined your ma-terial and has concluded that no violation of Federal law occurred. I am not willing to make that assumption. I am returning for your file, the information you have heretofore forwarded me and regret that I am not able to be of further service.

National issues were involved; life and death issues were involved.

If the FBI was lying, and sacrificing the lives that would be lost, the scandal was that much worse. Rather than let the matter drop, I replied and asked Waldie to obtain from Hoover the specific data to support his investigative claims. I asked:

1. The date that the FBI alleges to have contacted me and ex-amined my material, from which a determination was made that no violations of Federal laws were involved. The mere coverage of the multitude of Federal criminal, safety and Civil Service laws, for which the FBI has responsibility, would take at least several hours if not longer. There are at least eight criminal laws, a multitude of Federal safety laws, and Civil Service Commission regulations in-cluded in this area of responsibility.

2. What material was examined? There are 3500 pages of hear-


ing records, hundreds of pages of correspondence, some of which would imply fraud in statements to Congressmen. These specific areas would require considerable explanation to provide any inves-tigator with an understanding of the allegations. To examine these, it would take at the very minimum, one day, and probably longer. I hardly feel that my memory is so bad that I recall none of these ac-tions taking place.

Waldie surely recognized the seriousness of the implications. In an

apologetic manner he asked Hoover for this information. Hoover ig-nored the request, stating:

As indicated in my letter to you of February 27th, information which Mr. Stich has supplied the Bureau, both through correspon-dence and personal interview, has been considered and indicates no violation of Federal law within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI.

Expecting Private Citizen to Perform FBI’s Crime Fighting Waldie wrote back: “I would now suggest that you proceed through

a civil court action.” The problem with that statement was that: • A civil action is not an investigation of hard-core government cor-

ruption. • A private citizen shouldn’t have to finance crime fighting that was

the responsibility of the FBI. • The matter was so sensitive that no lawyer would handle it. • The cost to conduct such litigation would be in the hundreds of

thousands of dollars. • The civil litigation would not have the benefit of subpoena power. • It wasn’t my function to exercise the responsibilities for which

members of the U.S. Senate and House are paid and entrusted to perform.

The FBI and the Department of Justice routinely prosecute in criminal proceedings offenses that are a fraction of those that I brought to their attention. Thousands of lives would be lost over the years if my charges were true.

In a newsletter to his constituencies Waldie later wrote: It is readily apparent that there is an overwhelming lack of confi-dence in the integrity of the Legislative Branch. My concern with this ... stems from a conviction that each of the three Branches of Government are experiencing a similar decline in the confidence of the general public, and if this is so, the Nation is deeply threatened because self-government simply cannot function unless respect for


and confidence in its basic institutions exist among the governed. “The Part Played by the FBI” In order to place into the records the discrepancy between what

Hoover had stated to Waldie as the basis for denying my allegations, and what I recognized as the true facts, I wrote again to Hoover, stat-ing:

The purpose of this letter is to place into a single communication certain important facts known to both of us. The purpose being to clarify the conflicting facts between what you reported to Con-gressman Waldie, and what we both know to be the truth ... [gov-ernment fraud] intimately associated with the deaths of airline pas-sengers by willful misconduct. If these allegations and facts are true, the part played by the FBI is tragically manifest.

Hoover never replied to this strong letter from a government air

safety investigator. Simultaneously, Hoover repeatedly appealed to the public to show concern about crime, and to report any crimes to the proper security departments. I did both, and encountered the crime of obstruction of justice by the FBI and Department of Justice.

Learning that Representative Waldie was to be one of seven Con-gressmen named to a newly created House Committee to conduct an investigation of crime in the United States, I wrote:

I understand you are one of seven named to newly created House committee to conduct an investigation of crime in the United States. The resolution as I understand it authorizes this committee, including you of course, to conduct a full and complete investiga-tion and study of all aspects of crime in the nation ...

I suppose you and FBI Director Hoover would be working to-gether, as you did when I requested your help in exposing the seri-ous aviation and government fraud associated with the Salt Lake City and other air disasters. It pains me that so many aid and abet the conspirators in this crime that has left such horrendous human suffering in its wake. It further pains me that those who give com-fort and aid to the guilty, those in public positions of trust, continue their pious-appearing roles.

Waldie never answered. Futile Attempt to Circumvent Justice Department Obstruction of Justice Via Grand Jury Appearance Unable to proceed through the nation’s top law enforcement agen-

cies, I tried to circumvent the obstruction of justice of Justice Depart-ment people by notifying the foreman of the Federal grand jury at Den-ver that I wanted to provide testimony of federal crimes related to sev-


eral recent airline crashes that I discovered while a federal agent. The jury foreman then notified U.S. Attorney Lawrence Henry to have me appear, and this he did. The FAA refused to give me time off to appear before the grand jury, causing me to wire the jury foreman, explaining the problem, and requested that the grand jury subpoena me to appear. This was done.

Requesting Legal Advice Before Grand Jury Appearance Before leaving for the grand jury appearance at Denver, I contacted

lawyer Clyde Watts in Oklahoma City for legal guidance. He and law-yer Percy Foreman had defended General Edwin Walker, whom the federal government had incarcerated in a mental institution to silence him during the early civil rights movement. Watts listened attentively to what I told him.

Recognizing the culture in the Justice Department, Watts felt it was virtually impossible for me to win with the awesome power of govern-ment against me. It surprised him that the government hadn’t made trumped-up psychiatric charges against me and had me locked up, or in some manner gotten rid of me. The psychiatric charges had been made by an FAA supervising inspector sent from Washington to replace a prior supervising inspector, but that scheme was halted when the doctor refused to cooperate. (Details in my Unfriendly Skies book.)

Watts described the false arrest of General Walker by the govern-ment, the general’s placement in the federal prison at Springfield, and the difficulty in getting him released. A common scheme to silence a person was to charge him or her with a crime, arrest the person, claim the person had a mental disorder and could not stand trial, and then in-carcerate the person in a federal prison hospital indefinitely.

According to Watts, the office of Attorney General is a vast and powerful political machine, and that it was an easy matter for United Airlines or someone high up in government to influence government officials to take action against me. Many factors would be involved, including political contributions, outright bribes, or to protect high-level government people or covert government operations.

I thought of Attorney General Robert Kennedy‘s benevolent actions for United Airlines following the airline’s DC-8 crash into New York City, eliminating United Airlines from much of the financial responsi-bility, and wondered if it was related to some form of political contribu-tion.

Tips to Circumvent Justice Department Block of Grand Jury Investigation Assuming that the U.S. Attorney would thwart my presentation,

Watts gave me some tips for my grand jury presentation. This I inter-


preted as tampering with the jury. Watts apologized for not being able to help me, advising that he had to appear before the United States Su-preme Court on Walker’s behalf the following week.

Tampering with a Federal Grand Jury I received a cold reception from the grand jury, and encountered a

couple of outspoken jurors that controlled the actions of the other mem-bers, most of whom were unsophisticated and simply followed what the U.S. attorney wanted. They function as a jury only with the direction and guidance of the U.S. Attorney. In the complex matters I brought to their attention, they would not act unless advised to do so by the same U.S. Attorney and Justice Department employee who had been covering up for the corruption.

Indicting a Harm Sandwich A Wall Street Journal article dated August 11, 1989 described this

control by the U.S. Attorney over the average unsophisticated jury member: “Prosecutors can get grand juries to indict a ham sandwich, the old adage runs.”

Although I was ready to present my information and evidence, the U.S. Attorney stopped me, demanding to know the specific Federal statutes that pertained to the various criminal acts that were violated. He wanted the title and section of the criminal code pertaining to fraud, perjury, conspiracy and subordination of perjury, among others.

Surely the U.S. Attorney knew these numbers from constantly working with the particular statutes. And it wasn’t the function of a witness to a crime to brief the U.S. attorney on the particular statute that applied. It was a delaying tactic, obstructing my testimony before this federal grand jury. I just happened to have the information, but when I recited the specific statutes, he showed no interest and didn’t even write them down. The U.S. Attorney was obviously blocking my reporting of federal crimes, which is a crime by itself.

The U.S. Attorney took the position that would be parallel to a po-lice agency refusing to respond to a robbery call, on the basis the caller couldn’t cite the statute that was violated.

Justice Department Preceded my Appearance with Testimony From FAA Hearing Officer Guilty of Cover-Up I learned that the U.S. Attorney had arranged for the FAA’s Execu-

tive Director, William Jennings, to appear before the grand jury the day before I arrived. Jennings was a key part of the criminal cover-up, and the Justice Department used him to counteract my subsequent testi-mony. Jenning’s cover-up during the FAA hearing when I acted as an independent prosecutor caused him to share responsibility for subse-quent airline disasters arising from the same safety problems that I re-ported and which he covered up.


It became obvious that certain vocal grand jury members didn’t want to hear my allegations, or even to look at any of my supporting evidence. They acted as shills for the U.S. Attorney. The hostility of both the U.S. Attorney and these key jury members reflected jury tam-pering and obstruction of justice. My testimony and evidence were ob-viously not wanted, and the proceedings took on the bizarre air of a free-for-all proceeding.

Aggravated and disgusted at this spectacle, irritated that the U.S. Attorney would tamper with a grand jury hearing, I rose, closed my briefcase, and said:

I have evidence here of a major aviation and government crime that is being openly harbored and protected, a crime undertaken by government personnel in positions of trust, realizing that death would occur. Death did occur, at Salt Lake City, in a United Air-lines crash. Today, a former airline captain living here in Denver, is the scapegoat to protect the guilty in government.

As I started to gather my documents, the jury disbanded. But a few

of the jurors came over to me, and one said: “There must be something behind all this.” I replied, “I wouldn’t be here if there wasn’t.” Another jury member stated, “I admire you for trying; we need more like you.”

In The FBI Nobody Knows, author Fred J. Cook said of this feared government bureau: “An autocracy that was superior to and above the law it was supposed to serve; an autocracy so powerful, so unchal-lengeable, that it intimidated, if at times it did not actually terrify, even senators and congressmen.”

Possibly this fear was one of the reasons many Congressmen shied away from this scandal. The FBI could destroy a political career by simply announcing that an investigation was occurring of a particular member of Congress. Worse, they could fabricate charges, and convert an otherwise legal and normal activity into a crime. Conspiracy and misprision of felonies are excellent examples of the tactics used to im-prison thousands of American citizens. Examples of this conduct in-clude such members of Congress as Senator Robert Torricelli and Ohio Representative James Trafficant.

United Airlines Crewmembers Knew of the Fraud The night before my appearance in front of the Denver federal

grand jury, I called a United Airlines captain and personal friend. He and I had started up the Rocky Mountain Chapter of the American Theater Organ Society, composed of members who either owned one of the old theater pipe organs, or who had a fondness for them. I explained my grand jury appearance the following morning, and discussed the


problems I found at United, making reference to the violation of train-ing and qualification flights, the falsification of training records, and other problems. Possibly without thinking, he responded: “Oh, you mean the incomplete training flights.” His remarks added still more substance supporting the FAA report I uncovered during the FAA hear-ing at Denver.

Hoffa Contact Attorney General Robert Kennedy was trying to send Jimmy Hoffa

to prison for jury tampering at this time (1966), and he asked the public for information that might help him. My battles with the Justice De-partment came to Hoffa’s attention, and he sent an associate to my Oklahoma City home. It was ironic that the Justice Department sought to put Hoffa in prison for the crime of jury tampering that was less harmful to the public than the jury tampering by the U.S. Attorney as they sought to cover up for the ongoing corruption in the government’s aviation safety offices that had, and would continue to result in easily preventable airline disasters for years to come.

Hoffa’s fate might have changed if his associate had stayed to dis-cover the criminal activities in government offices that I tried to expose and the role of Justice Department people in covering up. But when he learned I was a government employee, he quickly left without hearing what I could have told him. At that time I welcomed help from any source to expose the deadly corruption.

Seeking Legal Help Exposing Corruption I needed legal help to fight this massive scandal, and I needed a

lawyer with a good knowledge of aviation and criminal law, and who would spend months taking a matter of this complexity through the federal courts. But this was an almost impossible task. First, the cost would be terribly high. Second, finding a lawyer with these qualifica-tions would be difficult. Third, any lawyer could be manipulated by the powerful legal and judicial fraternities to sabotage any such effort.

Some lawyers warned me that I would be seriously hurt if I contin-ued with these exposure activities, and that if an exposure did occur, I would have powerful interests viciously attacking me. I encountered lawyers who admitted the seriousness of the matter, indicating they would look into it and possibly assist, and who shortly thereafter be-came unavailable for any conversation whatsoever. I felt the legal fra-ternity was under the influence of the Justice Department, a suspicion that was supported by later developments, which have yet to be de-scribed.

I contacted one of the nation’s top aviation lawyers, Lee Kreindler, who was highly experienced in the aviation accident field. He had writ-ten technical books on aviation accident litigation, and was a recog-


nized authority in the field. Kreindler replied: Thank you for giving me the opportunity of reviewing these materi-als and, since I realize their importance to you, I am returning them herewith ... Since we do share ... a common interest in aviation safety and in view of your qualifications in this area, I would like to extend an invitation to you to visit our offices and talk further with us in this area should you ever have occasion to be in New York.

He refused to assist. Kreindler appeared on the TV show, The Avia-

tion Revolution (1969), and discussed safety problems, stating airlines occasionally “sacrifice safety for economic considerations.” I wrote to Kreindler, making reference to the show: “I sometimes wonder what crashes and what deaths would not have occurred if you had given at-tention to the serious matters that I presented to you last winter.”

Profiting from Air Disasters That He Made Possible Ironically, Kreindler and his law firm would profit over the years

from airline crashes made possible by the corruption in the govern-ment’s aviation safety offices that he helped cover up. These included the aviation disasters occurring on September 11, 2001.

One of the lawyers I contacted had previously worked for the De-partment of Justice. When he first saw some of my data he acknowl-edged its seriousness, adding, “I’ve never heard of anything like this!” As he was then working on the Bobby Baker case and was going to Washington in a few days, he stated he would check with his friends at the Department of Justice and get back to me when he returned. I left him some of my evidence

He never called, and my attempts to reach him were unsuccessful. However, when I called and told his secretary that I would pick up the data that I had left, he was immediately available to authorize its re-lease. When I picked up the material, his associate came out of his of-fice and looked at me as if I were involved in a very serious but lost cause. He said in what appeared to be an apologetic manner, “Lots of luck.” Many wished me luck, but none would help.

“I wish to warn you once again...” A Denver lawyer with whom I had previous business dealings in

the mid-1960s initially appeared very concerned, and indicated he might be able to help. This too changed. He wrote: “I wish to warn you once again that you are biting off an awful big piece when you take on United Airlines and the people entrenched in the FAA. As you point out, this thing is getting bigger and bigger all the time ... There are many ramifications that might arise...”

Another of the nation’s leading aviation lawyers, Stuart M. Speiser,


stated he might be able to help me. He wrote, “I certainly appreciate the gravity of the situation described in your letter.” In a subsequent letter he did not offer any help but stated he would “advise ... if there is any-thing further” he could do to assist me. On this letterhead I noted a change in the partnership; a name was added, Donald W. Madole, for-mer Chief of the NTSB Hearing Section, to whom I had appealed for help. I concluded that was the end of that relationship, and I was right.

“The matter is so serious...” I pressed Speiser for a reason why he could not represent me.

Speiser replied: We found from looking over the material that you sent to us that the matter is so serious and complicated it would be physically impos-sible for us to do justice to your positions.

These words from one of the most knowledgeable aviation lawyers

in our nation added further weight to the gravity of the air safety cor-ruption.

Complicity in Cover-up By Utah State Bar Association Using another approach, I sent a letter to the Utah State Bar Asso-

ciation, offering help to the plaintiffs in the Salt Lake City crash, and asked for the names of the plaintiff’s lawyers. The letter was directed to President Ray Christenson and properly belonged in the files of that association when he received it. I did not receive a reply, and I sent a follow up letter. No response.

Approached by FAA Legal Counsel at Oklahoma City I would shortly learn that Christenson was a lawyer retained by

United Airlines and that he had sent a copy of my letter to United, and to the Federal Aviation Administration, apparently in an attempt to get the FAA to silence me. While I was waiting for a reply to my letter from Christenson, which never came, FAA legal counsel John Graziano at Oklahoma City, contacted me and asked if I had been in contact with the Utah State Bar Association. Since my exposure activities were never kept quiet from the FAA, I did not hesitate to answer yes, but his request raised questions.

I told Graziano in a friendly manner to find out for himself what I had written to the Utah State Bar Association. I did describe to Graziano the nature of the FAA corruption I encountered in Denver. He became quite concerned. Unaware of the prior cover-ups within the FAA and thinking the FAA administrator was unaware of these matters, Graziano asked me to prepare a detailed letter for the FAA Adminis-trator, describing what I had stated to him. I felt the last thing the FAA Administrator wanted was to be confronted with more evidence. I im-mediately agreed.


“This is serious!” “That’s a great idea, John!” I immediately went to work preparing a

sixty-page document for transmittal to FAA Administrator Bozo McKee. After Graziano read the document he exclaimed, “This is seri-ous!” adding, “You surely keep your evidence under double lock and key, and behind locked doors.”

The report that I prepared was dynamite and required that my tes-timony be taken, and that my evidence be received. Further, federal criminal law required that they report the criminal charges to a federal judge or other official who could be expected to further investigate and prosecute.

“It’s a lonely fight taking on the role of a crusader.” Graziano was a competent lawyer, and clearly recognized the sig-

nificance of what I had reported. Several days later, as we were having lunch in the FAA cafeteria, Graziano said, “It’s a lonely fight taking on the role of a crusader.” I answered, “Yes, John, I know, it has been lonely and rough.”

Graziano later headed the nation’s Sky Marshall program dealing with hijackers. Oddly, the same corrupt culture that I was exposing would be responsible years later for the conditions that enabled terror-ists to hijack four airliners in a single morning.

Continued FAA Administrator Cover-Up After I prepared a detailed report of the corruption within the FAA

that had been associated with a series of fatal airline crashes and handed it to Graziano, I waited for the FAA Administrator’s reply to my report. After a few months, when no reply had come, I submitted a re-quest that I be advised “of the actions, or inactions, taken on my August 1 report.” The FAA replied: “We know of no entitlement you might have to a reply.”

“You’re going to get shot!” Typical of the concern felt by some of my FAA friends was the

statement by one FAA employee, “You’re going to get shot! They’re going to dynamite your house, or your car!” Another thought that the gravity of the problem was such that a hired killer would not be beyond the acts of present-day government. Government involvement in the planned assassination of foreign leaders, CIA dirty tricks, didn’t leave much doubt that this was a definite possibility. It also didn’t say much for the willingness or ability of people in the government’s aviation or police offices to insure that the federal government’s air safety respon-sibilities were being carried out.


Back to the Sabotage by Utah Bar Association and Lawyers While these actions at the FAA center in Oklahoma City were oc-

curring, I tried to find out what happened with my attempts to be of assistance to the victims of the Salt Lake City crash. I wrote to the President of the Utah Bar Association, demanding to know what had been done with my letters. At first, the Bar Association ignored the matter. But I finally forced an answer. The ethics committee wrote that Mr. Christenson was at the time and is now retained as legal counsel by United Airlines, and advised that he had received my letters and then sent one copy to United and one copy to the FAA. This was gross mis-conduct for the president of the State Bar Association to have done this. I sent a letter to the American Bar Association and its presidential assis-tant, James Spiro, describing what had happened, and made reference to the seriousness of the matter, stating:

Let me clarify the situation so that the urgency of the matter is clear to you. I had then, and I have now, factual and evidentiary material pertaining to criminal misconduct and fraud preceding the Salt Lake City disaster, obtained through my official position as government safety inspector assigned to United Airlines prior to that expected and forewarned air disaster.

In subsequent correspondence Spiro wrote:

It is assumed that you have been in touch with the lawyers for the plaintiffs in each of the cases which have been filed as a result of the ... United Airlines crash in Salt Lake City. May I suggest you also consider contacting our Standing Committee on Aeronautical Law so it may have the benefit of the special information you have about improper airline operations. The chairman of the committee is Mr. Sidney Goldstein ... Our wish is to be of as much help as our authority permits and we do hope you are convinced of our inten-tions in this regard.

Spiro again reminded me in another letter to write to Goldstein. So I did. Goldstein never answered. I advised Spiro of this and he replied:

As a believer in persistent pursuit of solutions to problems, I am confident that you will be successful if you persevere.

Lack of perseverance is something of which I could not be accused.

Several lawyers for Salt Lake City crash victims eventually learned of my existence and that I could help their clients get more financial com-pensation. They refused to contact me.


Friends Asking Whom to Contact If I Disappeared I received phone calls and letters from friends, concerned over my

safety, asking for instructions as to who to contact if something sud-denly happened to me. But who could I refer them to? Certainly not the people in control of the FBI or the Department of Justice.

I wasn’t oblivious to the possibility of physical danger. I took nu-merous precautions to protect myself, including keeping my not-too-docile Doberman Pincher, “Savage,” close at hand. I remembered the unsolved murder of another government employee, Henry Marshall, who uncovered the key to the Billy Sol Estes scandal in Texas. This government investigator was murdered on a remote section of farmland near Franklin, Texas. The Billie Sol Estes scandal had not yet broken and Marshall had the incriminating evidence and determination to ex-pose it, threatening many in politics, including President Lyndon John-son. It wasn’t until 1989 that the role played by former President John-son in Marshall’s death was revealed.

Constant Threat of Physical Harm Every time I started the engine of my car I thought of how easy it

would be for a stick of dynamite to eliminate the threat I represented to those involved in this scandal. Even today I wonder who may be lurk-ing in the shadows, but I shrugged off these feelings. The danger was real, but it was carried out in another manner.

The important aspect of the warnings by other government em-ployees and FAA inspectors was their belief that such things could hap-pen in our government today. This would of course greatly affect their willingness or ability to function effectively in air safety.

Attitude of Fear by Federal Aviation Safety Inspectors An example of how government inspectors were prevented from

correcting safety violations and safety problems was shown during a telephone conversation between a senior FAA safety inspector from Los Angeles and myself. The inspector, Carl Whitman, discussed his knowledge of serious safety problems at United Airlines and within the FAA. He stated: “We had the problems in the [United Airlines] Boeing program, though not what it was in the DC-8.” (The senior United Air-lines pilots were on the DC-8 program and they possessed more clout than the junior pilots on other aircraft programs such as the Boeing 720.) Referring to the inability to correct the safety problems at power-ful air carriers, Whitman continued: “We don’t have any backing. They’d crucify us!”

Referring to the experiences of my predecessor on the United DC-8 program, Frank Harrell, who tried to correct the same problems I later encountered, Whitman stated:


Harrell got into the same deal you did ... he went to Washington [to report the air safety and criminal acts] and when the chips were down, he was by himself.

Whitman added that he and another FAA inspector, George Sheri-

dan, attempted to dissuade Harrell from going to Washington, realizing the futility of attempting to buck well-entrenched pressure groups within the FAA. Whitman described the conversation that occurred in a Denver restaurant and bar, the Blue Onion, preceding Harrell’s depar-ture for Washington.

“Don’t do it!” “Let it die! We told him. Whatever you do, don’t do it,” Whitman

said to me. “It will take an out-of-Agency investigation ... you don’t have any backing.”

I well knew this, having been through the mill myself. I encoun-tered the problems Harrell encountered, and tried to correct them. I car-ried the fight longer, and lost more.

Referring again to Harrell, Whitman stated, “They made it very un-comfortable for Harrell and he had to leave.” (Harrell was forcibly transferred to Puerto Rico. A United Airlines flight standard check air-man later admitted to me that they told FAA management to get rid of Harrell, and warned that I would suffer the same fate.)

“Like a pack of wolves...” Referring to Hi Broiles, the former Principal Inspector responsible

for the United Airlines certificate, Whitman stated, “Hi is sick of all these things.” He continued:

We can’t be professionals right now. You know, any time any of us questions industry, automatically they all come upon us like a pack of wolves, you know, when a wolf gets a wound. It’s like a big game. It is a weird damn life. Just like the FAA Western Region, what backing do we get? None!

Referring again to the reaction when inspectors attempt to function:

“That’s right, coercion, they’d crucify us!” Whitman’s primary respon-sibilities were the training and check programs at American Airlines (where the safety attitude was good at that time.). Whitman was a good pilot and had an interest in promoting safety. Referring to the inability of FAA inspectors to obtain compliance with the FAA safety require-ments, and the difficulty of obtaining enforcement, Whitman said: “As soon as you enforce them, it hits them in the pocket. They go to the top in Washington and put pressure upon us.”

“It would implicate a lot of people if this gets out.” “Fellows admire you, they really do; we thank you for your forti-


tude. There are a lot of us that have bowed back, have avoided colli-sions with industry.” He went on to state “It would implicate a lot of people if this gets out.”

Carl Whitman and George Sheridan were two men I admired from the time I first joined the FAA. They were sincere, competent, dedicat-ed to air safety, and had a good analysis of the problems. The FAA didn’t have many like them. Whitman showed more courage than most inspectors.

George Sheridan had also been on the jets since they first entered commercial service. In a telephone conversation following the NTSB hearing on the Salt Lake City crash, and a year after the Denver griev-ance hearing, he stated his reactions to testimony given by United offi-cials responsible for air safety: “If these are the people we have to work with at United, assign me to Edde Airlines!”

This was a reference to a small charter operator whose air safety sophistication would expectedly be much less than with a large airline. Sheridan had taken the FAA assignment with United Airlines after I left the FAA, and discovered the same safety problems and FAA obstruc-tions that I found and encountered. Nothing had changed. It was too much for him, and he transferred back to Los Angeles.

I made the media aware of the serious corruption, from the mid-1960s to the present date. They knew of all aspects of this scandal and never once did they print a single word about the government corrup-tion. By their silence, they made possible many subsequent tragedies.

Those Who Perished in Air Tragedies Arising From Corruption Were No Match for These Groups Those who subsequently perished were no match for the holders of

public trust. To this day, the public pays the price. Before Watergate, it would have been difficult to convince the average person in the street of the government corruption behind many of the nation’s air disasters. Even I had trouble believing what was unfolding before my eyes. Wa-tergate was preceded by numerous scandals, and followed by many more, including the savings and loan, HUD, Defense Department, Ab-scam, and others that I write about in Defrauding America and Drug-ging America.

Possibly in reaction to my reports of the FAA criminal activities to Congress in 1964 and 1965, Congress passed legislation placing the FAA under the newly formed U.S. Department of Transportation. But this did not change the mentality of the bureaucracy. It served more as an excuse to imply corrective actions were taken.



CHAPTER THREE

History of Preventable Hijackings

mong the continuing aviation disasters that could have been easily prevented by FAA management, who had the authority and responsibility to order preventative measures, were aircraft

hijackings throughout the world. From 1970 to 2001, there were over 800 hijackings worldwide, some of which ended with catastrophic and deadly consequences.

Between 1930 and 1958, in the United States, there averaged less than one hijacking a year. But this frequency greatly increased in the 1960s and in the early 1970s. In 1969 and 1970 there were 150 hijack-ings. The modern history of hijacking commenced in 1959 when anti-Castro Cubans began seizing airliners to escape Cuba for the United States. The press lauded them at first as heroes, but when the shoe was on the other foot, and hijackings started in the other direction, the me-dia became critical of hijackers.

In one incident a pro-Castro hijacker armed with a long knife seized a National Airlines Convair 440, and diverted the flight to Cuba. Many others followed. Three months later, on July 24, 1961, a hijacker diverted an Eastern Airlines Electra to Havana. Castro initially seized the aircraft and released the crew and passengers, but several weeks later he released the aircraft. A hijacker boarded a Pacific Airlines DC-3 at Chico, California on July 31, 1961, shooting a loading agent. He then forced his way into the cockpit, where he shot the captain, permanently blinding him.

Forcing Congress to Intervene The murder and wounding of airline pilots caused the pilots’ union

to apply pressure on Congress, which at first did not respond. But when the pilots threatened a work stoppage, Congress finally acted, passing the Anti-hijacking Act of 1974. Congressional pressure then forced the

A


FAA to do what it had the authority and responsibility to do all along. The FAA issued a requirement that the door to the cockpit be locked, which was loosely enforced. Other easy to implement and inexpensive preventative measures against hijackings were ignored

Opposing these measures, including the screening of passengers, was the Air Transport Association (ATA). The Air Line Pilot Associa-tion tried to get Congress to add an amendment to the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, requiring detection procedures to detect concealed weap-ons on boarding passengers. ATA opposed any kind of passenger screening or search. The public soon forgot the prior tragedies, and nothing meaningful was done.

Pacific Airlines experienced another hijacking (May 7, 1964) that was fatal for everyone on board. Flight 773, a Fairchild F-27, departed Reno, Nevada for San Francisco. As the aircraft was approaching the San Francisco area, a passenger, Francisco Gonzales, forced his way into the cockpit and shot both pilots, causing the plane to plunge into the ground at nearly 400 miles an hour. The impact occurred about a mile from where I lived in Danville, California.

Subsequent investigation revealed that the gunman had purchased life insurance before boarding the plane at Reno, had bragged for the past several days that he was going to kill himself, and his gun and spent bullets were found at the crash scene.

Infamous D.B. Cooper hijacked a Northwest Airlines Boeing 727, and upon landing at Seattle demanded $200,000 in cash and a para-chute. After the money was placed on the aircraft, the aircraft took off and at night over wooded and mountainous terrain, the person calling himself Cooper—an assumed name—opened the rear airstair door and parachuted out. He was never found. Years later, hikers found some of the money along a mountain stream. It is believed that the name, D.B. Cooper, was either fabricated or copied from someone else’s name.

Other incidents occurred, including the hijacking of a Southern Air-lines plane on March 18, 1970. A passenger forced his way onto the flight station of a DC-9 at gunpoint and forced the crew to fly eastward over the Atlantic Ocean, with the intent of forcing the aircraft to ditch into the ocean. Unable to reason with the gunman, the pilots attacked the passenger. During the process the gunman killed the copilot and shot the captain, who barely remained conscious until landing the DC-9 at Boston.

Practical gun detection equipment had been available since 1960, but the FAA refused to require its use. FAA had appointed a special group to study the x-raying of passengers and carry-on baggage prior to boarding the aircraft. The FAA did not act until pressure from the death

Years of Preventable Hijackings 51

of the Southern Airlines copilot forced the FAA to act. X-ray screening became a reality, and hijacking dramatically de-

creased. Senator Vance Hartke, a powerful force in Congress during the 1960s, repeatedly attacked the screening of passengers, citing civil lib-erty violations.

Media publicity and resulting public pressure forced the FAA to in-stitute the sky marshal program that placed armed marshals on a small number of random flights.

In November 1972, three hijackers diverted a Southern Airlines DC-9 after it took off from Birmingham, Alabama, forcing the plane to land at Detroit, where they demanded $10 million from city officials. While waiting for the money, the hijackers got drunk, and forced all male passengers to disrobe. They terrorized everyone on board. After obtaining the money, the hijackers then forced the crew to take off, fly-ing to Canada and finally to Cuba.

The hijackers didn’t like the appearance of the Cuban troops, and again forced the aircraft to take off and land at Orlando, Florida, where FBI agents shot out the tires. In retaliation, the hijackers shot the copi-lot, and forced the captain to make a takeoff with flat tires. Somehow, despite the drag of the flat tires, the plane made it off the ground, trail-ing smoke from the burning tires. The DC-9 then landed for the second time back at Havana.

The regulations initiated in 1973 requiring screening for guns low-ered the number of hijackings. In the five years preceding 1973, there were 133 hijacking attempts. In the following ten years, there were only 73. The numbers continually decreased, lowering to 50 by 1985. In one of the few subsequent hijackings, a hijacker took over a Northwest Air-line 727 on January 20, 1983, but was shot and killed by an FBI agent.

A former mental patient boarded an American Airlines 727 at Los Angeles International Airport, on May 27, 1989, enroute to Miami, with a stop at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport. Although the security at Los Angeles International Airport was allegedly among the nation’s best, this former mental patient slipped through security carrying a bulky starter pistol, two knives, a pair of scissors, and was dressed in military combat fatigues.

Approaching Miami, the hijacker forced the plane to head for Ha-vana. When the pilots pleaded with him that the plane was running out of fuel, he allowed them to land at Miami. After 90 minutes of negotia-tion with the FBI, the hijacker surrendered. Fortunately, this drama ended peacefully for all 157 people on board. Not all such hijackings end without loss of life.

American Airlines did not detect weapons in 24 security tests in 1988, the worst performance among the 26 carriers tested. An Ameri-


can Airlines spokesman stated afterwards, “We really have no reason to question the effectiveness of our security in Los Angeles.”

The Overseas Picture was Different Overseas, the Arab-Israeli conflict caused bombings and hijack-

ings to increase. Hijackers took over an El Al airliner in August 1968 and forced the pilots to fly to Algeria. Terrorists caused the hijackings to become increasingly violent and deadly. In December 1968, two gunmen opened fire on an El Al airliner in Athens, Greece, killing one passenger and seriously wounding a cabin attendant. The two gunmen were captured and convicted, but released by the Greeks when terrorists threatened violence to Greece’s airlines. A continuing series of terrorist incidents followed.

Hijacking Four Airliners Simultaneously Israeli security grabbed two suspected Algerian terrorists off a Brit-

ish airliner making an enroute stop in Israel in August 1970. The sei-zure of the terrorists precipitated Arab retaliation and Arab terrorists hijacked four international flights simultaneously on September 6, 1970, including El Al, TWA, Pan Am, and Swissair. The El Al jet had an Israeli security guard on board, who shot it out with the hijackers, killing one, and seriously wounding a woman hijacker who had smug-gled two grenades on board the aircraft in her brassiere. The plane and passengers were saved from destruction by defective fuses in the gre-nades.

Terrorists seized an Alitalia Jetliner on September 25, 1982, during a flight from Algiers to Rome. Terrorists seized a Cyprus Airways jet-liner on January 8, 1985, and held 12 hostages at Beirut Airport. In 1984, according to U.S. State Department records, there were over 700 terrorist incidents throughout the world, an increase of forty percent over 1983.

The Ordeal of TWA Flight 847 Pro-Iranian militants hijacked TWA Flight 847 on June 14, 1985,

with 153 people on board. Three of the hijackers had arrived in Athens from Beirut the night before. They spent the night in the airport lounge, and prepared to board the TWA plane. Police detained one, but two oth-ers slipped through security. They carried two grenades and a pistol onto the plane wrapped in fiberglass insulation material and a nylon-traveling bag, which were not detected by security people.

The terrorists took over the jet after it picked up passengers in Bei-rut, and then ordered the captain to fly to different destinations in Europe and the Middle East, including Beirut, where the control tower operator twice denied the plane permission to land. Authorities eventu-ally relented, and agreed to refuel the aircraft in exchange for the re-


lease of 17 women and two children. The aircraft took off, and then returned, with only about one minute of fuel remaining. The ordeal lasted four days.

During this hijacking, the terrorists badly beat some of the passen-gers. They killed U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem, and dumped his body out of the aircraft onto the ramp. Eventually one of the militants, Mohammed Ali Hamadei, was brought to trial in a West German court, and on May 16, 1989, he was sentenced to prison. The day before the sentence, terrorists kidnapped three West Germans in Lebanon, seeking to put pressure on the Frankfurt court. The terrorists demanded freedom for 17 Shiites imprisoned in Kuwait for bomb attacks, and the release of hundreds of Shiite guerrillas transferred south to Israeli prisons be-fore Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

Terrorists seized a Kuwait Airways jet on April 5, 1988 as it was flying from Bangkok to Kuwait, and forced it to land at Cyprus. A week later the terrorists were still holding the plane and passengers hos-tage. Terrorists killed two of the passengers, and dumped them out of the aircraft at Cyprus. As the terrorists threw the bodies from the air-plane, the airport was operating in a business-as-usual atmosphere. The tragedy unfolded within sight of crowds of vacationers. Tour groups went by the plane as the bodies lay on the ramp. A Scandinavia Airlines jet landed and discharged passengers, without noticing the hijacked jet, or the bodies lying on the pavement.

Hijackers took over an Indian Airlines 737 enroute to Lahore, Paki-stan on July 5, 1985, which had earmarks of an earlier aircraft diversion from India to Pakistan on January 30, 1971. In the earlier hijacking the Pakistani government granted the hijackers asylum and treated them as heroes. This time the hijackers were jailed. Hijackers took over an Egypt Air jet in 1985, which resulted in sixty deaths when Egyptian troops stormed the plane in Malta.

Incredible Horror on Pan Am Flight 73 Horror and death were the fate of many in the hijacking of Pan Am

Boeing 747, Flight 73. This tragedy occurred while the plane was on the ground at Karachi, boarding passengers bound for Frankfurt. As the passengers were boarding, a van pulled up and four men leaped out, and boarded the plane, spraying it with gunfire. They immediately shot one passenger and threw him out of the plane. The flight deck crew, hearing the commotion, locked the cockpit door and climbed out the pilot’s windows to safety. The hijackers were stranded, and unable to go to their planned destination at Cyprus.

Angry, they set a deadline for a new flight crew to arrive. As it grew dark, the on-board fuel-driven electrical power unit ran out of oil, causing it to fail. This in turn caused the emergency lights to shift to


battery power. The air conditioning unit stopped operating, resulting in stifling heat build-up in the cabin. Eventually, the batteries went dead, causing the lights to go out. When this happened, the hijackers pan-icked, and shot their high-powered guns point-blank at the passengers, blowing some of them to pieces. The hijackers threw hand-grenades among the passengers, killing sixteen people and seriously wounding fifty others. It was a gruesome blood bath.

In the panic, hundreds of passengers leaped from the plane through the emergency exits. Outside, encountering Pakistani security forces, the passengers screamed for them to stop the killing going on inside. Instead, the Pakistani forces waited for ten to fifteen minutes, as the killings continued, before entering the plane.

In another Pan Am 747 hijacking, the terrorists forced the crew and passengers to fly to Cairo, where passengers evacuated by emergency chutes, and the terrorists blew up the plane in a spectacular explosion and fire. Hijackers forced two aircraft to an abandoned World War II airstrip in Jordan, forcing the occupants to stay in the aircraft for nearly two weeks, without air conditioning or sanitation facilities. The hijack-ers wanted the British to release a wounded woman hijacker, which the British refused to do.

Another team of hijackers seized a British airliner and flew it to the Jordanian airfield. Through international pressures, and the subsequent release of the wounded female hijacker, the terrorists finally released their captives, followed by blowing up the plane. The hijacking was later fictionalized in the movie and novel Black Sunday. This bizarre series of hijackings was given the name “Black September.”

Hijackers seized a Kuwaiti airliner on a flight from Kuwait to Paki-stan, killing three passengers while on the ground at Tehran Airport. The terrorists dumped the victims from the plane as if they were sacks of potatoes.

Desperation and Anger Over Policies by U.S. Leaders The increasing violence was motivated to a great extent by the arm-

ing, preferential treatment, and support for Israel’s occupation of Arab land in 1967.

Greater Aviation Terrorism Ahead, said Senator Boren Senator David Boren of Oklahoma, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in an interview that “I think we’re in for a long period of problems with the cartels, and potentially some terrorist retaliation.” This would include hijackings, which I had warned the senators in one of my letters was one of many air tragedies that could be prevented if FAA managers would only respond to the reports given by its federal air safety inspectors.


Fired Airline Employee Murdering Pilots A hijacking by a recently fired airline employee of Pacific South-west Airline (PSA) resulted in the deaths of everyone on board. The hijacker had boarded the aircraft with a gun, evading security by use of his employee badge, and then after the aircraft was enroute from Los Angeles to Oakland, California, the hijacker entered the cockpit and shot both pilots. The aircraft then plunged to the ground near Salinas, California.

Deadly Hijacking of Egyptian Airlines Boeing 767 On November 23, 1996, shortly after Egyptian Airlines Flight 767

took off from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to Nairobi, three passengers rushed into the cockpit and ordered the pilots to fly to Australia. They would not listen to the pilot who told them the aircraft did not have enough fuel to go that distance. The plane then headed for the island of Mauritius in the Indian Ocean.

The hijackers were armed with an ax and a fire extinguisher. As the aircraft’s fuel supply was nearly exhausted, the hijackers refused to heed the captain’s warning. The captain pleaded with the hijackers to let him land on a small airstrip in Moroni, the capital of the Comoro Islands in the Indian Ocean. The hijackers refused.

Approaching the Comores Islands, the engines suddenly ran out of fuel. The captain attempted to ditch the aircraft in shallow waters 500 yards offshore from a tourist resort at Le Galawa Beach, north of Mo-roni. As he flared the aircraft before impact, the left engine and wingtip hit the water, causing the aircraft to flip over and break apart, as tourists on the beach watched in horror. Many grabbed boats to rescue survi-vors. Two honeymooners with a video camera recorded the ditching of the aircraft. Of the 172 people on board, 127 died.

The plane’s captain, Leul Abate, later stated that the hijackers said they wanted to “make history.” Franklin Huddle, the U.S. consul gen-eral in Bombay, stated, “They were not high-tech hijackers. People on the aircraft were screaming; some were praying. I thought we were dead when we hit the water.” The hotel that had been a pleasure desti-nation for tourists used its conference room for a morgue.

Many Hijackings Occurred on Foreign Airlines An FAA report showed that an average of 12 hijackings a year oc-

curred in the 1990s, increasing to twenty in 2000, with half of them occurring in the Middle East. Obviously, U.S. government personnel responsible for air safety knew there was a serious and deadly problem, and also had the information about how most hijackings could be pre-vented.

One of the many hijackings occurred on Avianca Airlines on April


12, 1999, as five hijackers took over the aircraft. The Twin-engine Fok-ker 50 aircraft departed Pallo Negro Airport in Bucaramanga, Colom-bia, and shortly after takeoff five hijackers sitting in various parts of the aircraft took over the plane. The hijackers were dressed in business suits and one wore the collar of a Catholic priest.

Upon entering the cockpit, the pilots were ordered to land at a dirt airstrip near the town of Simiti in Colombia. All passengers were then herded into boats at the nearby Magdalena River and then dispersed in various remote locations. Nearly a year later, more than a dozen of the passengers were still held hostage.

Easy and Inexpensive Preventative Measures Not Taken by FAA While I was a federal air safety inspector, among the many reports

and accident-preventative recommendations that I made, were recom-mendations that would have easily prevented most of fatal hijackings. The two preventative measures that would have been adequate in those days were (a) do not allow the cabin flight attendants to have keys to the cockpit doors, which can be easily taken from female flight atten-dants by a hijacker; and (b) the cockpit door is to remain locked throughout the flight.

These and many other safety reports were routinely ignored by FAA management, a condition that exists to this day. The deeply en-trenched culture within the FAA operational ranks will not be corrected by high management platitudes. The arrogance and corruption, and some of the tragic disasters caused or enabled to occur by this conduct, must first be fully exposed.

DOJ Department Personnel Embracing Terrorist Bombers A Columbian Boeing 727 belonging to Avianca Airlines blew up shortly after takeoff from Bogotá on November 28, 1989. A bomb was left in the cabin by a passenger who left the aircraft before it taxied out. The people involved in this attack included drug dealers Pablo Escobar and Jimmy Ellard, an accomplice with Escobar in massive drug smug-gling. As I describe in Drugging America, Justice Department person-nel subsequently used Ellard as a key witness in prosecuting an under-cover agent for U.S. Customs, Rodney Matthews. Ellard was portrayed to the jury as an honorable and honest witness, and provided money and other benefits to Ellard for his testimony. Matthews, working as a contract confidential witness, was exposing drug smuggling activities of major drug smugglers—and by people with the CIA.

Interfering with Investigation of Possible Terrorists Attack An Arrow Air DC-8, carrying United States service men from the

Middle East crashed during takeoff from Gander. The plane had


stopped at Gander, Newfoundland, for fuel on December 12, 1985. That was Canada’s worst aviation crash involving a U.S. airliner carry-ing military personnel. The DC-8 was barely airborne from Gander when it crashed to the ground within half a mile of the end of the run-way, leaving a trail of debris. All 256 persons on board perished, in-cluding 248 soldiers from the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne Division.

Unprecedented Dissent by Investigators Resulting from U.S. Cover-Up The Canadian Aviation Safety Board investigated the crash and di-

vided sharply as to its cause. Five members blamed the crash on ice adhering to the wings, while four members thought the crash was due to a bomb. Another Board member, Roger L. Lacroix, quit under pro-test, claiming that evidence was withheld from the crash investigation. At least five of them had the courage to disagree, rather than the NTSB cover-up as is routine, and which makes the American NTSB a contrib-uting cause to subsequent crashes.

Those blaming the crash on the bomb cited evidence of a bomb blast, and several parallels between the Gander crash and the bombing of Pan American Flight 103 at Lockerbie, Scotland. Herb Gray, the Liberal Party leader in the House of Commons at Ottawa, Ontario, claimed there was a cover-up.

Included in the evidence supporting the cover-up theory was a memo (February 24, 1986) written by Michael Mendez, Director of Maintenance for Arrow Air, to Betty Batchelor, wife of the airline’s owner. In the memo Mendez described his arrival at Gander the day after the crash, and being denied admission to the crash site. The se-crecy was allegedly requested by U.S. Army Major General John S. Crosby, who had arrived from Washington, D.C. with his staff. Later that day, Crosby, members of the Canadian Aviation Safety Board, the FBI, and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board toured the ac-cident site, and again refused Mendez access to the site.

Unprecedented Destruction of Crash Scene Contrary to crash investigations, Major General Crosby wanted to

immediately bulldoze over the crash site, even though an investigation had not occurred, resulting in evidence being destroyed. Mendez de-scribed some strange events concerning the accident investigation, in-cluding pressure from the U.S. Army to immediately plow the wreck-age into the ground.

Transport Canada’s critique of both the majority and minority re-port on the accident stated that many factors were overlooked in both reports by the Canadian Aviation Safety Board. Canada’s Transport Minister, Benoit Bouchard, requested former Canadian Supreme Court Justice, William Estey, to make an informal review of the accident in-


vestigation. (Aviation Week & Space Technology, July 31, 1989.) Estey looked over the record and concluded, without calling any

witnesses, that nothing was overlooked in the investigation. This con-tradicted the split opinion of the Canadian Aviation Safety Board (CASB) and Transport Canada’s report. Estey’s report stated:

The testimony and material gathered by the Board [Canadian Avia-tion Safety Board] does not show that ice contamination of the leading edge or upper surface of the wing was the cause of the acci-dent. Furthermore, nothing in the material placed before the Board reveals the cause of the accident.

Without ordering further investigation, Estey then concluded that

the crash-cause could not be determined. The incomplete status of the record showed the need for taking testimony, which the judge refused to do. He simply refused to allow the investigation to proceed, despite the unusual issues raised that demanded an investigation. Parliament member, Don Boudria, responded to Estey’s report, stating his party would ask for Senate hearing on the Gander crash when Parliament reconvened in the fall.

In the United States, two congressmen, Representative Robin Tal-lon of South Carolina, and Representative C.W. Young of Florida, re-quested an investigation to determine what the U.S. government knew about the Gander crash. Young asked the investigative staff of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense to check government archives for any information about the Gander crash, including classi-fied reports.

Earlier, Young requested Secretary of State James Baker to request Canada to reopen the investigation into the crash. Baker refused to do so, claiming that U.S. government aviation authorities had no reason to doubt the Canadian investigation reports. Three and a half years after the Gander crash, in July 1989, Tallon requested Attorney General Richard Thornburgh to release the censored portion of the FBI report.

Not satisfied with the refusal to conduct an investigation, Tallon told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime (December 4, 1990) that federal agencies appear to be guilty of “ineptness or the best-contrived cover-up ever” in the Gander crash. Subcommittee chairman William Hughes stated: “Incredibly, no U.S. government agency, or at least none with official responsibility, demonstrated any determination to find out just what caused the crash. The National Transportation Safety Board, and other agencies of the U.S. government, chose to sit back and watch as the Canadian efforts became embroiled in contro-versy.”


After the crash had occurred, an anonymous caller said that Islamic

Jihad, a pro-Iranian terrorist group, had put a bomb on the plane. Army Colonel Lewis Millett said, “When a terrorist organization took credit for this abomination, why was this claim not investigated, and a report made to the American people?”

Tallon and others suggested that the plane might have been blown up by terrorists in connection with the Iran-Contra affair. The Reagan administration authorized a shipment of Hawk missiles to Iran less than three weeks before the plane crashed. The missiles were not the kind the Iranians expected. In retaliation, terrorists might have planted an explosive device aboard the plane, said Dr. J.D. Phillips, a pathologist, whose only son was killed in the crash.

Prophetic Forecast as it Relates to Problems Arising From Corruption in Government’s Air Safety Positions During the 1966 FAA safety grievance hearing, I described the cor-

ruption and deaths that had already happened, and warned what would happen if a cover-up occurred. These warnings were prophetic state-ments of what would obviously follow. In the first printing of the Un-friendly Skies, in 1978, I made comments in the last chapter that time has proven correct. A few of the comments appearing in the 1980, sec-ond edition, follows:

The scandal is now so serious, and involves so many, that cor-rection can only come from outside of government. That means you, the unorganized citizen, must step in. This is highly unlikely. With the vast breakdown in the government and non-government checks and balances, no one within government can risk taking corrective actions or blowing the whistle. They would be destroyed, as they have done to me. It is virtually impossible to have the provisions of law respond in a situation of this magnitude.

The Executive Branch of government is going to cover up so as to protect itself from very serious criminal charges. Congress is go-ing to cover up to protect its criminal participation in all this. And the Judicial Branch, acting piously above the law, is going to go to any length to protect its own involvement in this protective scheme.

The most common bond linking so many together in this gov-ernment and air safety scandal is the legal fraternity. No other force in our society today can so adversely affect our lives, can block our constitutional and statutory safeguards. They are the ones, who can openly prostitute the laws, knowing that they inter-pret the law, prosecute or not prosecute for such violations, and in their capacities as judges, punish or not punish for such violations. The lawyers control the courts; they control the Department of Jus-


tice investigative and prosecuting functions. Lawyers occupy more Congressional seats than any other profession, and Congress con-trols the selection of federal judges from the legal fraternity.

These pages reveal a virtual “government Mafia” in which a massive conspiracy exists to protect the perpetrators of a vicious air safety hoax that considers lives expendable. It seeks to protect the perpetrators and those in all three branches of government guilty of criminal cover-up. Arrogant bureaucrats that are pro-tected at a cost in human life, potentially yours

Watergate was child’s play, involving a foolish cover-up of two-bit bugging, and common political skullduggery. High government officials including the United States Attorney General received prison sentences for a relatively minor cover-up. They were prose-cuted by the Department of Justice and Congress, and sentenced to prison by the federal courts. Many of these same individuals who appeared so pious and respectful of the law in judging and prose-cuting the Watergate defendants actively participated in a criminal cover-up that would knowingly cause great loss of life

The consequences of the Watergate cover-up were minor. The consequences of this air safety cover-up were and still are horren-dous. The scandal described with these pages exists at this very moment. The Paris DC-10 crash was an especially horrible conse-quence of long-standing FAA misconduct, but there will be more of the same as government corruption adversely affects air safety.

The FAA’s cover-up of this safety problem goes to the heart of the fact that it is presently unfit to manage the nation’s air safety activities. The question of willful misconduct as it pertains to crashes resulting from this cover-up also enters the picture. Some personnel in key positions should be charged with federal crimes that led to the deaths of innocent air travelers. But this won’t hap-pen.

Respected business men are prosecuted by the Justice Depart-ment and have had their personal and business lives ruined, ending up in prison, for often unintentional violations of some obscure law, such as price fixing, when they did not even know such an act was occurring. Yet, the Justice Department engages in this criminal cover-up knowing that death is a resulting byproduct, showing its contempt for the lives of our citizens.

It has been many years since those 1978 comments were made.

What has happened since then? Those who engaged in the corruption, either directly or in the criminal duplicity of silence, are on a roll. The


corruption continues, as does the related horror and deaths. The FAA and NTSB conduct continues as before. The NTSB continues to falsify official crash reports, partly to protect themselves. The Justice Depart-ment lawyers continue their cover-up and persecution to protect their earlier misconduct. The media continues their cover-up. Senators and Representatives continue their duplicitous cover-up.

The gravity of the charges and exposures in the 1978 book was ar-ticulated by numerous book reviewers. A few samples: American Li-brary Association Booklist stated, “Unfriendly Skies is a record of scandal, disaster, and heartbreak that demands an accounting from the highest levels of the industry and government.” Professional Pilot magazine wrote, “May make Watergate look like kid stuff.” Manches-ter Guardian publisher Ed Loeb wrote, “A fine book.” Bookviews stated, “He charges a cover-up of such proportions even the mass media don’t want to touch the story, and I must say, makes a good case.”

Book Review’s Jan Frazer said, “In this shocking book, Rodney Stich presents impressive evidence to show that a virtual government Mafia does indeed exist. Larry Rumley of Seattle Times Magazine wrote, “The Unfriendly Skies is a shocking report. The facts he cites are devastating, indicating dereliction of duty and responsibility by airlines and the federal authority supposedly checking on them.”

Many members of the U.S. Senate and House admitted the gravity of the allegations. Federal judges admitted the gravity of the charges. They then engaged in cover-up, knowingly sacrificing the lives that continued to be lost. No one cared.

Starting in the 21st Century, the number of airline crashes greatly decreased, but not because the problems within certain areas of the FAA had changed, which hadn’t changed. The changes that resulted in far fewer crashes included, for instance: • Aircraft systems being far more reliable and malfunction less often.

It was the incorrect handling of these system failures that was one of the major causes of airline crashes.

• Aircraft systems have been installed in aircraft that greatly de-creases the chance of a midair collision.

• Aircraft systems installed in aircraft warning pilots they were fly-ing into rising terrain, compensating for poor piloting.

• Air traffic controllers and radar now monitor most airliner flights and warn pilots if they are flying too low for the existing obstacles.

• Jet aircraft do not require the immediate and correct reaction when an engine fails, as do propeller aircraft.


Deep-Seated Culture within FAA Still Exists Although many things have changed to improve airline safety, the

basic deep-seated problems within the FAA remained the same, with management blocking correction of safety problems and safety viola-tions. Airliner safety is affected by these internal problems, and a clas-sic example was the refusal by FAA management to order the known inexpensive preventative measures to block hijackings of airliners. Failures within the FAA in this one area would adversely affect the lives of countless numbers of people at a later date, and create national emergencies. Again, cover-ups prevented taking the necessary correc-tive actions.

FAA Culture Also Resulted in Terrorist Related Air Disasters The culture within the FAA, especially as it related to the endless

pattern of blocking those few technically qualified safety inspectors to function, and blocking urgently required actions to prevent various types of airline disasters, blocked efforts to prevent airline bombings, hijackings, and missile attacks.

Downing of TWA Flight 800 Cover-ups by personnel of the NTSB and Justice Department sur-

faced in a major terrorist attack on TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747 that had taken off from JFK airport in New York. Considerable evidence pointed to a missile attack, more evidence than the NTSB had used in the past in other airline disasters to determine the probable cause. Here is what happened.

On July 17, 1996, a TWA Boeing 747 took off from New York’s JFK airport, and as it was flying over the Atlantic Ocean within sight of people on Long Island, it suddenly blew up and fell into the ocean, kill-ing 230 people.

Dozens of witnesses appeared on television stations in the New York City area, reporting that they saw a thin streak of light going to-ward the plane, followed by an ordinance-colored explosion, and which was then followed by reddish-colored fuel-type explosions.

One of Dozens of Missile Trails Seen by Military Pilot Among the many people witnessing the ascending missile trail was

the command pilot of an Air National Guard HH-60 helicopter that had just taken off from Francis S. Gabreski Airport on Long Island. As the helicopter lifted off, Major Frederick C. Meyer saw in his windshield a fast-moving ascending streak, followed by a high-velocity military-type ordinance explosion. That explosion was then followed by two or three low-velocity fuel-type explosions.

Meyer had seen many missiles in Vietnam and knew what missile trails look like, and knew the visual difference between a missile explo-


sion and a fuel explosion. There is a noticeable color difference be-tween the two. There is also a visual speed difference between the two, with the flash from a missile explosion moving much faster than the flash from fuel explosion.

During one of his many appearances to describe what he had seen as his helicopter was facing the ocean, Meyer said:

I saw in front of me and slightly to my left a streak of light in the sky. My reaction when I saw it was, “What the hell is that?” I observed it for approximately three to five seconds moving in a gradually ascending arc, sort of what you would observe at night if you observed a shooting star. The difference is that it was red-orange in color and it was broad daylight.

I observed the streak of light for three to five seconds. And then I saw an explosion. And about one to two seconds after that I saw a second, and possibly a third, explosion. The first was like an HPX explosion, as opposed to a “soft” explosion like gasoline.

The first left a cloud of smoke, just like a flak explosion does, almost pure white in color. The position of that explosion appeared to be slightly below and behind where one would have anticipated the streak of light to have gone. One to two seconds later, there was a second, and possibly third, softer, explosion, unlike the first one. These grew rapidly into a huge fireball four times the diameter of the sun. I was dumbstruck. In another description of what he saw, Meyer said:

I’m recalling what I observed in Vietnam. Different things ex-ploding have different visual characteristics. If you saw a fuel stor-age depot hit, the type of explosion that would occur would be slow. The second explosion was a soft explosion. It was definitely petro-leum. I was in position to observe A-4s and F-4s hitting storage depots [in Vietnam] and watching the color of a storage depot that’s being hit and exploding. It was huge.

My copilot, Chris, said to me, “Is that pyro?” And I said to him, “No pyro like I’ve ever seen.” Because at that time, by the time those words came out, this fireball was huge.” I said, “Let’s take a look.” We flew at about 200 feet over the water, 150 knots indicated, in the direction of the fireball and the fire.

The short eight miles to the falling debris was covered in about three minutes. Meyer described what he found:

I saw the body of a young woman with blond hair wearing a white outfit, and it was in perfect condition, floating face down. She was hanging in the water like the dead man’s float. The fireball had hit the water before we crossed the beach. We estimated that it had


taken approximately 10 seconds to fall. I expected the fireball to be extinguished when it hit the water;

but it just continued to burn. And it burned across, not as a ring. The whole thing burned, and those flames were 50 feet high. We measured them because we were hovering at 50 feet over the water and we were looking at the tops of the flames.

As we approached we saw the thing fall, something fell out of this plume of smoke that was following the fireball into the water. Something fell out. We observed something like a vortex inside the fireball. I saw something fall out of it.

[Varying Rates of Plunging Objects] As we approached the fireball, I told Chris to slow down. We

were moving at about 150 knots, and I could see debris falling out of the sky. I was looking at debris, fuselage, aluminum skin, stum-bling in the air. Now, if you shred an aircraft and it tumbles in the air, it’s falling at somewhere up to 40 miles an hour and it’s falling in an erratic way. They spin and flop.

Right in the middle of this field of falling debris, some of it burning, there are subjects moving down at terminal velocity of 160 and 180 knots. If you do any parachute jumping, you are falling at pretty close to 180 knots. Thinner guys fall at about 160 knots. I’m presuming that these were seats, and there were people in them, were falling at 160 to 180 knots.

Now, they couldn’t have debris tumbling, lightweight debris tumbling in the air, falling past my field of vision in the same field with objects moving at terminal velocity if they had emanated from the same spot at the same time.

[People First Blown Upward] The logical answer to me is that the heavy stuff had to go some-

where else first, before it came down, or it wouldn’t have come down and been passing the slower moving objects. That indicated to me that these seats had been blown vertically upward, with the people in them. They had to be blown vertically up to zero accel-eration and then start down.

We went to the fireball area and we decided immediately that we would not go downwind, because now we had a lake of fire. The ocean did not quench this at all. It was burning in the middle. It was burning at an incredible intensity. These flames were 50 feet high. The helicopter was hovering at 50 feet on the radar altimeter and we’re looking at the top of the flames.

We knew that if we tried to go downwind we’d probably get into the smoke and the exhaust. And if we weren’t choked ourselves,


the engines might be choked and we’d go down. So we went to the northwest end of the arc, and began working around to the south-west. We eventually reached the southwesterly hemisphere of this lake of fire at between 50 and 100 feet, looking for anything asso-ciated with the aircraft.

The first things we saw on the left side of the aircraft were four bodies. I told my copilot who was flying, “Turn and check them out.” We came down to 40 feet to shake them up with the rotor wash. There was one guy wearing a T-shirt and dungarees. Chris said, “Looks to me like they’re all dead. We left them, looking else-where for possible survivors.

As we moved around this arc on the windward edge of the fire, we saw some debris. The first thing we saw that indicated that we had an aircraft was the section of the plastic lining that is in most commercial airliners where the windows are. You see an almost square window with the corners rounded and there’s usually a shade that you pull up and down. So now we knew we had an air-craft down.

We went further around the arc and we saw this huge airfoil, which looked like a wing, but it was the rudder. The rudder on the 747 is so damn big. This thing was partially out of the water; par-tially elevated and partially sunk.

We saw more debris as we started working our way around to the southeasterly side of the fireball. When we got there we came upon a cluster of debris of all kinds; honeycomb metal, seats, and a cluster of 30 to 35 bodies. We went down to 40 feet, shaking them up with the rotor wash looking for any signs of life. We saw what looked like a raft. When we got closer we realized that it was a par-tially inflated escape slide, the type you see on a commercial air-liner. There was nobody in it. Attached to that slide was a flashing strobe light that automatically activates when the emergency evacuation slide extends.

At this point the tower contacted us and told us that air traffic control just reported that they lost radar contact with a 747. When we heard that we realized that there’s another 200 people out here”

The sun was now starting to set and it’s starting to get dark. I told Chris that I wanted to start a creeping line search, using a half-mile space. I wanted it oriented 2-4-0 and I wanted a creeping line search. That’s a search where we basically fly sideways and we fly and then we move forward a half a mile, and then we come back across the same path again. We basically fly a back and forth pat-tern moving, advancing at the end of a two-mile track, and we move forward a half-mile.


As a Missile-Detection Expert, Meyer Identified the Missile Meyer was convinced that what he saw was a missile. He said, “I

spent a number of years in Vietnam and had seen missiles fired, some of them at me.” He said the streak was red-orange in color, followed by a yellowish-white explosion that looked identical to the detonation of an antiaircraft shell.

Meyer sought to report what he had seen to NTSB and FBI person-nel, but was turned away. They had no interest! Meyer then started speaking to groups and on radio and television shows, explaining what he saw and the lack of interest by FBI and NTSB personnel.

These so-called investigators had one of the most qualified people anywhere who saw the entire event occurring, and didn’t want to hear the evidence! They were either stupid, or instructed to cover up for any indication of terrorist action.

Meyer said, as reported in Aviation Week: I’m not a professor with a Ph.D. in explosion watching, I’m an eyewitness. I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion. And whatever I saw, the explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event. It was one of the results. Something happened before that which was the initiator of the disaster. Everyone involved in the FBI and NTSB is intelligent enough to know that. Meyer’s Talk to FBI, NTSB, Industry Group During a discussion before a group consisting of aviation

personnel, including an agent from the FBI and an investigator from the NTSB, Meyer referred to the lack of interest given to his observations by the NTSB and FBI:

I went to the FBI trailer office and said to the FBI agents, “I was the pilot of the helicopter that witnessed the events relating to TWA Flight 800; do you want to interview me?? Two agents said, “Oh, yeah.” And then, as an afterthought, they took me into a back room and said, “Well, go ahead and tell us, and they turned on a small handheld tape recorder.” I basically told them my story and then asked, “Do you have any questions? They said no. I was in the trailer about six minutes.

[Explaining Characteristics of Different SAM Missiles] I’ve seen three types of missiles while in Vietnam: SAM-1s,

SAM-2s, and SAM-7s. A SAM-7 is a wild looking thing coming at you, because it comes at you like a corkscrew. But a SAM-1 and SAM-2 go through the air with a slight wiggle but smooth flight path. These missiles leave smoke trails.

A SAM-1 and a SAM-2 leave a trail 10,000 feet long in the air.


A SAM-7 leaves a trail too. You can see these damn spirals after the missile is gone. And matter of fact, what you’re probably seeing is the smoke because the missile’s moving too fast to be seen.

This thing that I observed was a very steady path. And it wasn’t a long time. It was maybe five seconds total. It was a very steady thing. It didn’t have an erratic smoke trail. It didn’t appear to have an erratic flight path. At a later date, Meyer said in a clarifying Email sent to me (July

13, 2002): I saw a fast moving streak crossing the sky, my left center to my

further left, in a gradually descending arc. I observed the streak for about 3-5 seconds. It then disappeared for about one second. Then I saw on the same trajectory and further to my left a high velocity ordinance explosion. It was yellow white in color with black smoke. Military ordinance. Two and a half seconds later, further to my left but lower, I saw a second high velocity explosion.

This appeared to be brilliant white light, like an old fashion flash bulb. Very little smoke, but what there was, was white-gray. Two and a half to three seconds later, further to my left and still lower, I saw one, possibly two, nearly concentric, nearly coinciden-tal high velocity explosions so close in location and time that I’m not sure if there were one or two. From that same point immedi-ately came the low velocity fuel explosion. The fireball, trailing a column of thick black smoke, fell to the sea.

I did not immediately determine that the streak was a missile. It looked too smooth for the missiles I had seen in Vietnam. I thought more of some sort of “Schallenwerfer,” (rocket propelled artillery shells) until I spoke with Richard Goss, an eyewitness who had been sitting on the porch of the Westhampton Yacht Squadron club-house having lunch. He heard a noise and looked up to see the mis-sile climbing straight up in front of him.

He told me he then saw it make a sharp turn to the Southeast and head out to sea. Paul Angeledes saw the same thing. I then knew that the reasons the missile’s path was smooth was because it was in a hard turn. It had acquired its target at max deflection and was turning hard to center the target in its cone of acquisition. The turn did not look that sharp from my aspect because I could detect only the vertical vector, not the horizontal vector. FBI Gag Order to Cover Up Evidence of Terrorist Attack The FBI cover-up was followed by FBI agents giving Meyer and

his copilot a gag order barring them from talking to the news media that


would prevent the public from discovering that the downing of TWA Flight 800 was a terrorist act.

Converting Thin Missile Trail with Massive Fuel Explosions During a November 1997 FBI press briefing, FBI agents stated that

the missile trail that people reported was actually burning fuel from the ruptured fuel tanks on TWA Flight 800, as the aircraft climbed three thousand feet after exploding.

The FBI sought to support this deception with a video prepared in collaboration with the CIA. The video implied that the sequence com-menced with the center fuel tank exploding, which caused the entire front part of the aircraft to break off, exposing the open cabin to the onrushing air. The video then indicated that the 747—minus its entire front section—then climbed several thousand feet, trailing flames. It was the trailing flames which people on the ground thought was the missile trail.

There is a vast difference between a pencil-like missile streak and a massive fuel-fed fireball. Only an unsophisticated public and a com-plicit media could accept such a blatantly false scenario.

Among Hundreds of Other Witnesses Lou Desyron, one of several fishermen who saw the missile trail,

told ABC World News (July 21, 1996), We saw what appeared to be a flare going straight up. We thought it was from a boat. It was a bright reddish-orange color.

Similar reports came from over 200 people who saw the missile

trail; many of them professionals. While Linda Kabot was taking pic-tures at a fund-raiser dinner for Mayor Vince Cannuscio at East Quogue Beach on Long Island a blast was heard nearby. Her camera recorded an object streaking upward.

NTSB Continuing Decades of Cover Ups A five-day NTSB hearing commenced on December 8, 1997, and

under normal hearing procedure, the NTSB examines all the evidence during its investigation, including hearing from eyewitnesses. However, the NTSB did not allow any evidence or reference to the missile that nearly 200 people saw. The NTSB limited attention to areas for which there was not a shred of evidence; a low-voltage electrical malfunction that the NTSB claimed caused a spark to occur, exploding the fuel in the center fuel tank, and the argument that the air conditioning units, situated near the center fuel tank, heated the fuel and made the jet fuel easy to explode.

Unprecedented Misinformation and Cover-Up The blatant cover-up was not reported by media people. Justice


Department and NTSB officials were fabricating implausible theories while refusing to give credit to the heavy evidence of a missile strike. It was another example of what I had seen for the past 30 years, starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent discovering the cover-ups—not by the professional NTSB investigators—but by the political NTSB board members.

An anonymous letter appearing in the October 1996 California Sun (Ojai, California) described the experience of a California couple who were vacationing on Long Island at the time of the blast and who saw the missile trail. The couple made a report to the FBI about the missile trail, and received a reaction many others received. His letter describing the reaction stated in part:

They questioned us in separate rooms and made us feel like crimi-nals. They said that what we must have seen was a shooting star or some fireworks being shot from a boat. I told them that it was not anything like that at all. I said that it was definitely a flare type rocket heading toward the aircraft; then it exploded. It was then suggested that we did not see anything at all and that we were go-ing along with what other people said they saw. Just for the excite-ment of it. I told them, “No way, I know what I saw...They scared the hell out of us.” My Prior Warnings of Missile Attacks to FBI and Congress Shortly before the downing of TWA Flight 800, one of my CIA

sources, Ronald Rewald, who had previously been the head of a major covert CIA operation based in Honolulu, BBRDW, had given me in-formation of surface-to-air-missiles being offered at no charge to the United States. He was involved in negotiations occurring at Long Beach, California, involving an Afghanistan warlord—who offered the missiles—and CIA-FBI representatives. For some inexplicable reason, the missiles were rejected, and would then be offered for sale to other terrorists. (Further details in Defrauding America.)

Rewald had been part of the negotiations and was concerned after the missiles were rejected, knowing they would then be sold to terror-ists. He gave me information about the meetings and documentation, including the serial numbers of the missiles being offered.

I immediately contacted members of Congress, explaining the situation and the dangerous blowback consequences from rejecting the missiles. I urged them to immediately contact me and my CIA source in an effort to obtain the missiles before they were sold to terrorists. Every member of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees was con-tacted by mail. Not a single one responded. Among the members of Congress who received copies of the letters was Senator Arlen Specter,


and a copy of that letter follows:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 510-944-1930; FAX 510-295-1203 October 20, 1995 Senator Arlen Specter United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Certified: P 427 892 268

Ref: Refusal by CIA and Justice Department officials to accept the “gift” of 30-40 Stinger missiles, suggesting a hidden agenda, with possible catastrophic consequences in shooting down commercial airliners.

Dear Senator Specter:

My sources in the intelligence community have recently given me details of efforts by Afghani rebels to turn over to the United States, without charge, 30 to 40 Stinger missiles (SAM), with a possibility of an additional 100 mis-siles thereafter. Incredibly, this offer was rejected by Justice Department and Central Intelligence Agency officials. There is a strong probability that one or more of these rejected missiles will be used to shoot down commercial airlin-ers. If this occurs, not only will the carnage be horrendous, but it will inflict severe financial havoc upon the aviation industry and upon air travel. The fol-lowing is a brief description of what has transpired:

Synopsis of CIA and Justice Department Tactics Insuring That the SAM Missiles Will Be Available to Terrorists Recent information provided to me by one or more of my many contacts

in the CIA community describes the dates, places, and people involved in of-fering the missiles to the United States, and the rejection of this offer. These sources provided me with precise details of the negotiations to give the mis-siles to the United States, the agreement by Afghan rebel leader, General Rashid Dostum, and a CIA attorney.

CIA headquarters was initially made aware of the offer through a letter sent by a former CIA agent whom I have known for about five years, and whom I consider very honorable and reliable. That letter went unanswered. The agent, concerned about the consequences of commercial airliners being shot down with these missiles, then contacted another CIA employee at CIA headquarters, who then tried to force a response from high CIA officials. This latest action forced CIA officials to finally respond.

Negotiations then commenced, which involved, among others, the former CIA agent who headed a major CIA proprietary in Hawaii; a CIA attorney in the Los Angeles area; an Afghani located in California; and an Afghani rebel general in Afghanistan (who had previously turned over 20 Stinger missiles to the United States).

The general agreed to turn over the missiles without cost to the United States, and simply requested the release of an Afghani being held in federal prison on a drug charge arising from a possible KGB setup. At the same time that the Afghan general was offering to give these missiles to the United

Years of Preventable Hijackings 71States, these same missiles were being sought by terrorist groups who bid large amounts of money for them. One obvious possible use for these missiles in terrorist hands would be to shoot down commercial airlines.

Incredibly, CIA and Justice Department officials rejected the offer, insur-ing that the missiles would fall into the hands of terrorists, where some of them may be at this very moment.

The Afghani initially offered to give to the CIA 30 to 40 Stinger (follow-ing an earlier return of 20 Stinger missiles), with a possibility that 100 more would be delivered thereafter. The CIA and Justice Department requested se-rial numbers for several of the missiles to determine that the missiles were actually available. These serial numbers1 were then provided, and the numbers were confirmed by U.S. authorities as authentic.

After telephone contact was made with this Afghan general (General Dos-tum), a written agreement was signed by a Los Angeles area CIA attorney, the Afghani in California, and the former CIA agent who the Afghans were using to insure that the CIA and Justice Department kept their word.

Knowledge of corrupt CIA and Justice Department activities My prior experience as a federal and then a private investigator, and a

confidant to many former CIA and other deep-cover people seeking to expose government corruption, has enabled me to recognize the corrupt conduct of these two government agencies. I strongly feel that this rejection indicates a secret agenda that could inflict additional great harm upon America. This con-duct would be compatible with the corrupt activities and harm that I have de-tailed and documented during the past 30 years of attempts to expose the ac-tivities of corrupt government officials and employees.

Possible Reasons For Refusing The Missiles There are several possible reasons for the CIA and Justice Department re-

fusing to accept the missiles, and each of them is in character for these two groups. One would be my prior attempts to expose the missile threat and the cover-up of that danger by CIA and Justice Department officials. The offer to provide the missiles at no charge went through a former CIA agent who was made the titular head of a large and covert CIA proprietary in Hawaii: Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham and Wong (BBRD&W). This covert operation that was based within the United States (Honolulu) had offices in 17 countries, and replaced another CIA operation and scandal known as Nugan Hand Bank with headquarters in Australia. After a Honolulu television station blew the cover on BBRD&W, officials in control of the CIA and Justice Department sought to cover for the CIA operation by fraudulently charging with criminal conduct the head of that CIA proprietary.

Another reason would be to cover up for a prior CIA operation based in Hawaii. That issue is detailed in the books, Explosive Secrets of CIA Covert Operations, and the book, Disavow. If the missiles had been accepted, it is possible that this sacrificed agent would be identified and the massive fraud involving the Hawaiian and Nugan Hand operations would then surface. (Ex-posure of this type of misconduct would reveal that the Justice Department’s conduct at Ruby Ridge and Waco are only the tip of the iceberg.)


CIA need for continuing crises. Another possibility for CIA and Justice Department rejection of the Stinger missiles is that the CIA wants the missiles to fall into terrorists’ hands, and actually wants an airliner to be shot down. The shoot-down of a commercial airliner could then be used to justify the con-tinuation of CIA activities. This scenario is not as bizarre as it sounds when a person understands the history of corrupt CIA and Justice Department activi-ties and the great harm inflicted upon the United States through criminal ac-tivities. I describe these activities in books that I have written, Defrauding America and to a lesser extent, Unfriendly Skies.

A Prior Air Tragedy Involved With CIA-DEA-Justice Department Misconduct Pam Am 103. Despite the cover-up by the CIA and Justice Department

(and by Congress and much of the mainstream media), substantial evidence indicates that the Pan Am 103 tragedy was made possible by CIA-DEA mis-conduct associated with a pattern of illicit drug smuggling into the United States. My deep-cover contacts, along with information obtained from other sources, indicates that the CIA and DEA had an established drug pipeline from Nicosia and Beirut into the United States using Pan Am aircraft. Pan Am’s involvement started at Frankfort, Germany.

Ironically, one of the same DEA agents involved in that drug pipeline, Michael T. Hurley, was used to retaliate against a witness who testified to Congress concerning the Justice Department’s involvement in the Inslaw scan-dal. Justice Department officials retaliated against Michael Riconosciuto for testifying before Congress about the Justice Department’s involvement in the Inslaw scandal. This is a routine criminal misuse of Justice Department offices and power. Officials prosecuted Lester Coleman, a former intelligence agency asset who blew the whistle on the CIA-DEA involvement in the Pan Am tragedy. Justice Department officials prosecuted Juval Aviv in retaliation for uncovering evidence showing CIA-DEA involvement in that tragedy. (I have a long list of others who were fraudulently prosecuted to silence them, including the long persecution of me in retaliation for exposing these crimes against America.)

Pattern Of Congressional and Media Cover-up None of the corrupt government activities that I identify could continue

without the criminal cover-up by members of Congress and by most of the U.S. mainstream media. I repeatedly offered to provide evidence to you and other members of Congress (and the media) of hard-core criminal activities involving federal officials, and the only response was silence (i.e., misprision of felonies, cover-up, obstruction of justice). This same misprision of felonies has put many citizens in prison (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4), even though they were less guilty than government officials, members of Congress, and the media, who have a greater responsibility to report these crimes.

On the surface, although very serious, this missile matter does not appear to have the subversive and criminal nature of other criminal conduct that I exposed. However, it demands a full, open, congressional investigation.

Fortunately for everyone involved in these criminal activities, the main-stream media has kept the lid on the scandals, and most Americans are too

Years of Preventable Hijackings 73preoccupied with trivia, and totally unwilling to meet their responsibilities under our form of government.

Vested Interest In Continuing the Cover-up Based upon 30 years of experience in attempting to expose hard-core gov-

ernment corruption, starting while I was a federal investigator, it would be my expectation that you will cover up this matter. For many years, and especially during the past five years, I have made you aware of criminal activities2 in-volving government employees and officials, including corrupt officials within the Central Intelligence Agency, the Justice Department, and crooked judges. Each of you therefore have a vested interest in preventing the American people from learning about these criminal activities3 and what has been done to the American people.

But there is the possibility that despite the media cover-up, and the pub-lic’s incredible illiteracy about government misconduct, that a small percent-age of the American people will learn about it and demand justice. If one or more commercial aircraft are blown out of the sky, your prior knowledge will be publicized. So you have a dilemma as to what to do with this information. You certainly can’t meet your responsibilities by turning this information over to the same Justice Department that is corruptly involved with the various criminal activities that I brought to your attention.

Sincerely, Rodney Stich cc: Broadcast and print media. Every member of the Senate and House intelligence Committees via iden-

tical letter.

ENDNOTES 1. The Stinger missiles serial numbers provided by the Afghans included

the following: Lot Nos. GDP 84D 001-320 362956; GDP 84J 001-320 363602; GDP 86G 001-387 369587; GDP 84G 001-320 363387.

2. The criminal activities that Stich initially discovered while a federal in-vestigator included: (a) widespread and deeply entrenched pattern of CIA and DEA drug smuggling into the United States, aided and abetted by persons in employed by Customs, Justice Department, and other government agencies and branches; (b) converting federal bankruptcy courts into criminal enter-prises through looting of assets by a conspiracy consisting of federal judges, trustees, covert Justice Department and CIA law firms; (c) CIA involvement in looting U.S. financial institutions, including the savings and loans; (d) CIA scheme known as “October Surprise,” and its cover-up; (e) Inslaw corruption involving Justice Department personnel and federal judges; (f) Operation Mount Rushmore, a CIA/Mossad scheme to assassinate presidential candidate Bill Clinton in San Francisco; (g) criminal cover-up and obstruction of justice by Justice Department personnel, federal judges, and others, of each of these and other crimes; (h) felony persecution of informants, whistleblowers, and protesting victims by federal judges and prosecutors; (i) involvement of


California judges in helping to carry out several of these schemes, including a ten-year pattern of judicial acts against Rodney Stich while violating blocks of California and federal statutes and constitutional protections, making them co-conspirators.

3. It is a criminal offense to threaten any person who seeks to report fed-eral crimes.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an infor-mant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bod-ily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another per-son, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or pos-sible commission of a Federal offense ...

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness/informant. Applies to anyone who (b) uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another per-son, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to (1) influence, delay or prevent that person’s testimony in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to (A) withhold testi-mony; or withhold a record from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impart the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a ... judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense, ...

1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens

another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to

(1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding: shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both. [1988 amended reading]

4. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of felony). “Whoever, having knowl-edge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Continuing the Pattern of Cover-Up Not a single one of the two dozen members of Congress responded

to the letters. Here I was, a former key federal agent, along with the former head of a major secret CIA operation, providing sufficient in-formation to show the subject and the potential consequences were se-rious, and not a single response! This is the same type of contemptible conduct that I had seen of vast numbers of members of Congress prior to that time, and which continued thereafter, to this very day. There were serious ramifications to their repeated cover-ups.


Offering Post-Disaster Missile Information to FBI Personnel After the downing of TWA Flight 800, I offered to provide infor-

mation to the FBI about the missiles. FBI Agent James Kallstrom who initially controlled the investigation ignored my offer. At a later date, on July 24, 1996, two FBI agents called and wanted to meet. I wouldn’t meet them at my residence, but stated I would meet them at a nearby shopping center.

The agents didn’t want any information on the rejected missiles; their only interest was to warn me to remain quiet about what I knew. This warning was repeated during a phone call about an hour after we met, when Special Agent V. Stewart Daley warned me to remain quiet. I told him that I encountered FBI cover-up for the past 30 years, starting while I was a federal investigator, and I was not about to remain silent now.

To make a record of the FBI’s meeting I sent a July 30, 1996 letter to the FBI describing the events as I saw them. A copy of my letter to the FBI follows.

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 510-944-1930; FAX 510-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Disavow, & Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot

July 30, 1996

V. Stewart Daley, Special Agent Federal Bureau of Investigation 1850 Gateway Blvd, Suite 1010 Concord, CA 94520 Certified: P427 892054

Ref: TWA Flight 800; SAM missiles offered to US and rejected; and July 24, 1996 meeting with FBI agent. Dear Sir: The purpose of this letter is to make a record relating to what transpired

during a meeting and subsequent telephone conversation between myself and FBI agent V. Stewart Daley on July 24, 1996: • The San Francisco FBI office contacted me on July 24, 1996, arranging

for a meeting that afternoon between myself and FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, which did occur, outside of the Rossmoor Diner in Walnut Creek, California.

• The purpose of the visit by FBI agent Daley was supposed to discuss the letters that I had sent to members of the House and Senate intelligence


committees on October 20, 1995, and a copy of those letters to FBI agent Jim Kallstrom on July 21, 1996. Kallstrom is the lead FBI agent in charge of the criminal investigation involving TWA Flight 800.

• The intent of my October 20, 1995 letter to those members of Congress was to alert them to a very serious matter, requiring their immediate atten-tion, that would otherwise probably culminate in one or more missiles be-ing acquired and used by terrorists to shoot down commercial airliners.

• Prior to my sending that October 20th letter, one of my many CIA sources had expressed concern to me in October 1995 that surface-to-air missiles (SAM) would be made available to terrorists by the inexplicable actions of Justice Department and CIA personnel. My source described his par-ticipation in the efforts of Afghan rebels who were offering 40 to 60 mis-siles to the United States, through the Justice Department and Central In-telligence Agency, at no cost to the United States. They also advised that an additional 100 missiles may also be made available. The only consid-eration attached to this gift of SAM missiles was that a young son of one of the rebel leaders be released from federal prison at Terminal Island. He had been convicted of a drug-related offense.

• It was known to these Justice Department and CIA employees that terror-ists were offering $100,000 each for several of these missiles. Knowing this, and knowing that the missiles would probably be used to shoot down commercial airlines, Justice Department and CIA officials refused to ac-cept them. This CIA source recognized this probable consequence of the rejection, and conveyed his concern to me. He then provided me with suf-ficient documentation to establish the truth of his statements, including copies of letters to and from the Justice Department, serial numbers of some of the missiles, and other data. Informing Congress of Impending Shoot-down of Passenger Airliners

• I then informed each member of the House and Senate intelligence com-mittees through that October 20, 1995 letter, making them aware of the probable shoot-down of a passenger airliner if they did not immediately intervene and seek to halt the sale of these missiles to terrorist groups. I made it clear that I had documents to support these statements and could provide them with other information. I urged them to immediately contact me for further information.

• Despite the horror that would probably follow failure to take im-mediate actions, not a single member of Congress contacted me.

• My credibility could not have been an issue. Those letters provided infor-mation on my background, including years as a former federal investiga-tor in the Federal Aviation Administration, a member of sophisticated in-telligence and aviation groups, a writer of highly technical, detailed, and documented books, and long experience in these areas. Standard FBI Cover-up and Obstruction of Justice

• During this July 24, 1996 meeting with FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, I de-scribed in general terms the nature of the missile problem and the possi-

Years of Preventable Hijackings 77bility that TWA Flight 800 was shot down by a missile, and that other pas-senger airliners would probably be shot down by the missiles made avail-able to terrorist groups by the conduct of these Justice Department and CIA officials. I also made it clear that I was using this meeting to make the FBI aware of other criminal activities that I had discovered. These were major criminal activities inflicting death upon many people, and were inflicting great harm upon national security. These criminal activities included, among many others:

• Pattern of FAA corruption related to a series of airline crashes and deaths. I detailed and documented these activities in the third edition of Un-friendly Skies, the second edition of Defrauding America, in thousands of pages of testimony and evidence placed into a FAA hearing that I forced upon the agency. I charged the existence of deeply entrenched FAA cor-ruption (and corruption at a major airline) associated with a series of fatal airline crashes that I and other federal inspectors had uncovered as part of our official duties. These corrupt activities were made known to high level management in the FAA, NTSB, Justice Department, and to members of Congress, some of whom had already been advised of these problems by other FAA inspectors. They all covered up, making possible the continua-tion of the FAA culture, the air safety misconduct, and the resulting crashes. This mindset continues, making possible many of the airline crashes that continue to occur.

• Pattern of corruption implicating high-level federal officials relating to long-standing drug trafficking into the United States, This would include evidence that I have accumulated for the past seven years (and longer) from my many CIA and other deep-cover sources. Heavily involved in this cover-up (and prosecution of whistleblowers) are Justice Department employees and federal judges, as described in part in my two detailed and documented books.

• Massive corruption in the Ninth Circuit bankruptcy courts, looting the assets of people who exercise the statutory protections of Chapter 11, un-aware of the enormous fraud involving judges, US and private trustees, law firms, and lawyers.

• Justice Department cover-up of the CIA-DEA drug pipeline, misusing Pan Am aircraft, making possible the placement of the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, and the fraudulent prosecution of people who seek to expose the truth. There is similarity between Justice Department cover-up be-tween the two TWA mishaps in the New York City area and the Lockerbie disaster. This cover-up of the CIA-DEA drug pipeline has protected the terrorists who actually placed the bomb on board Pan Am 103. It was the illicit activities of CIA and DEA personnel that made possible the place-ment of the bomb on board the aircraft, making these US employees partly responsible for the bombing and deaths. Cover-up of Tragedy-Related Corruption Combined With Threats To Remain Quiet

• Shortly after I returned home from that meeting, FBI agent Daley con-tacted me by phone, and warned me not to repeat any of the information


that I had provided to him. He had no interest in any of these criminal matters, despite the gravity of the matters and their harmful effects upon national security.

• No interest was shown in any of these areas by FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, including specifics on the missiles.

• I reminded him that he had a duty under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4, and other criminal statutes, to arrange for me and my sources to give evidence to a proper investigative body. He repeated his warning that I keep this in-formation to myself. How the Public Paid For These Crimes and the Cover-up

• TWA Flight 800. If this flight was actually shot down by a missile, the matter of Justice Department and CIA rejection of the SAM missiles is of grave concern to the United States. What agenda do these officials have that are subjecting the United States to such tragic consequences? And if TWA Flight 800 was not shot down by a missile, when will the missiles, in the hands of terrorists, be used to shoot down a passenger airliner?

• Further complicating this matter is the refusal by any of the two dozen members of the Senate and House intelligence committees to obtain from me the confidential data that I have acquired after they received that ur-gent letter. They also appeared willing to sacrifice the lives that would very probably be lost through missile attacks.

• Cover-up behind the downing of the TWA Flight over Staten Island many years ago, killing everyone on board. A prior tragedy befalling TWA, within miles of the downing of TWA Flight 800, was associated with criminal misconduct on the part of FAA management (and others), and occurred on a program for which I held federal air safety responsibilities shortly after that tragedy occurred (the world’s worst at that time). Evi-dence of this relationship (and of the criminal misconduct in other airline crashes occurring in my area of federal air safety responsibilities) is found in the records of an unprecedented four-month-long FAA safety hearing (E20GFAA) that I forced upon the FAA while holding federal authority to make such determinations. During that hearing I acted as a prosecutor, producing official documents and testimony to support my charges. FAA legal staff and the top aide to the FAA administrator engaged in cover-up during the hearing, in perjury, subornation of perjury, that continued the FAA culture, the serious air safety and criminal violations, which then caused or made possible other crashes in my area of air safety responsi-bilities.

• This hearing was preceded by several air disasters on programs for which I had federal air safety responsibilities, followed by identical air disasters (plus two air disasters occurring during the hearing). These activities were accompanied by cover-up involving officials in various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice, members of Congress, and others. They all played a role in the deaths associated with the specific air disasters.

• Harm to national security, to US institutions, and the deaths of many peo-ple, and establishing a corrupt culture in government institutions, espe-

Years of Preventable Hijackings 79cially the FAA, Justice Department, and Central Intelligence Agency. FBI Reaction To This Pattern of Tragedy Related Criminality Despite the gravity of the matters brought to your attention, and to other

divisions of the Justice Department by a former federal investigator, no at-tempt was made to receive my evidence and testimony, and that of my sources.

Your telephone conversation consisted of a warning for me to remain quiet. This coincides with prior actions and inactions of Justice Department officials. It is of interest that a federal criminal statute provides for any citizen to report a federal crime to a federal judge (or other federal tribunal), and if a citizen fails to promptly do this, he has committed a criminal act. It should be of great concern to Americans that every attempt to report these criminal acts to federal judges has been judicially blocked. These judges, with the assistance of Justice Department employees, have prevented me from making such re-ports. They have rendered orders barring me from federal court access, which blocks me from making the reports that they are required to receive under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4. The two books, Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America detail and document these and many other examples of misconduct involving federal employees.

Sincerely, Rodney Stich

cc: Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, Constitution Avenue and 10th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530. FAX 202-514-4371. Senate Intelligence Committee FAX 202-224-1772; House Intelligence Committee FAX 202-225-1991.

More Intrigue I appeared as a guest on the Los Angeles radio show hosted by Pe-

ter Ford, the son of Glenn Ford and actress Eleanor Powell (December 4, 1996), along with Jeremy Crocker, who had conducted considerable research into the downing of TWA Flight 800, interviewing people in different parts of the United States. Crocker, who built the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway, had taken an interest in Flight 800 and had done considerable research into it. Shortly after the show, Crocker dis-appeared and at the time of this writing, he had not been found.

Seeking Court Order to Obtain Evidence An article in the San Francisco Chronicle (December 17, 1977) re-

lating to evidence being covered up by the NTSB stated: New York. TWA and Boeing asked a judge yesterday to help

them get evidence from the criminal investigation into the TWA Flight 800 explosion statements from people who thought they saw


a missile near the plane. The lawyers made the appeal to U.S. Dis-trict Judge Robert W. Sweet during a routine pretrial hearing in the case brought by some of the families of 230 people who died in the July 17, 1996 disaster.

Steve Bell, a Boeing lawyer, said the companies had been de-nied evidence relating to the criminal investigation by the FBI and the National Transportation Safety Board. Bell said evidence that could show a jury that a bomb or missile may have caused the dis-aster was “obviously relevant. It means somebody else is responsi-ble, not Boeing.” Lawyers and Next-Of-Kin Opposed Missile Evidence Lawyers and next-of-kin were unhappy with Boeing’s position.

They would lose money if the cause of the crash were due to a terrorist act, and not any fault of Boeing. The same resistance existed with ex-posing the truth as to how the bomb got put on board Pan Am Flight 103; if the placement of the bomb on Flight 103 was facilitated by a CIA-DEA drug operation using Pan Am aircraft, that would most likely take the blame from Pan American, reducing the chances of lawyers and next-of-kin being rewarded for the tragedy.

Years Afterwards, No Material Change To 747 Fuel System For years thereafter, there were no material changes made to the

Boeing 747s center fuel tanks, providing further indication that the NTSB—which has less expertise than the huge Boeing Company—really did not believe that the explosion of the center fuel tank (and the other fuel tanks) was due to an internal spark. Four years later, in 2004, the FAA delayed the implementation of the fuel tank changes for an additional four years, clearly indicating that this was not considered a threat to safety, and probably not the blame for the demise of Flight 800.

A Reuter article (August 25, 1996) was titled, “Investigator: Nitro Found In TWA Wreck.” The article stated:

Traces of the flammable liquid nitroglycerin have been found in the wreckage of TWA Flight 800 bolstering the theory that an explosive device destroyed the plane, the New York Daily News said in its Sunday edition. The report by the Daily News comes just two days after the New York Times said traces of PETN, a chemical com-pound commonly found in both plastic explosives and surface-to-air missiles, was found on a piece of seat from the Boeing 747’s passenger cabin.


Another Reuter article (August 30, 1996) was titled, “More Explo-sive Traces Found in TWA Debris.” The article stated:

Investigators have found more microscopic traces of explosives on debris from TWA Flight 800 but said they could not conclude that a bomb or missile caused the plane to crash last month, offi-cials said Friday. Other traces of chemical explosive were found on the plane’s wreckage last week.

Although investigators officially said they were “of unknown origin,” they have said privately that PETN, a chemical used in plastic explosives, was found on a piece of a passenger seat located near the center fuel tank where the two wings join the fuselage. CBS News reported on Friday that a compound found in the wreckage was “strikingly similar” to one discovered at the crash site of Pan Am Flight 103, which exploded over Lockerbie, Scot-land, in 1988 killing all 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground.

Explosive Residue Discovered CBS News said it learned that the FBI lab had identified residue of

a plastic explosive called “RDX” on a section in the rear of the jet, which bolstered the explosives theory because “RDX and PETN are mixed together to make high-powered explosives.” It also threatened the FBI and NTSB cover-up of a missile attack.

An aviation expert and a law enforcement official who was an ex-plosives specialist told CBS that he saw several fist-sized holes punched through the backs of two seats on the far right side of row 23. That is in the center of the area pinpointed by the computer as the site of the initial blast. The microscopic traces of PETN also were found in that general area. No similar holes had been found in other seats.

Several other media reports published similar articles as a result of their own investigations. But suddenly, all such articles disappeared, as if they were simultaneously ordered to halt the reports on the pretext of national security.


CHAPTER FOUR

DOJ’s Ripple Effect: 1993 WTC Bombing

he events described in this chapter show the culture in other government offices when faced with criminal activities ad-versely affecting national issues, and what happens to conscien-

tious government agents who attempt to perform their official duties. It adds additional information about the sordid culture in government of-fices, and how it enabled the events of 9/11 to occur.

Key Terrorists Entering United States In September 1991, Ramzi Yousef entered the United States with

Mohammed Ajaj. Customs agents discovered Ajaj had bomb-making manuals and other terrorist-manuals, causing him to be arrested. Yousef claimed political asylum and was allowed to enter the United States, pending a court hearing. He was then lost in the follow-up.

Ramzi Yousef joined up with a group in Jersey City composed of Yousef’s uncle, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Omar Abdel Rahman (the blind Sheikh); Mohammed Salameh; Mahmud Abouhalima; and Abdel Rahman Yasin.

They started building a bomb in a public storage unit in Jersey City, with the intention of causing the collapse of one of the World Trade Center towers.

During the late 1980s, the FBI New York office knew the names and some of the activities of some of the terrorists who would bomb the World Trade Center in 1993 and commit other terrorist acts, but failed to follow up on the information.

Mole Inside the Jersey City Terror Cell FBI Special Agent Nancy Floyd befriended a former Egyptian

army officer, Emad Salem, who was hired at her request as an FBI in-formant. Salem’s Arab background made him accessible to terrorist activities, which he passed on to Floyd. These tidbits included planned terrorist activities occurring in a Jersey City Mosque, Masjid al Salaam.

T


Salem’s handlers were FBI Special Agent John Anticev and NYPD detective Lou Napoli, who were members in the Joint Terrorist Task Force (JTTF) between the FBI and the New York police Department.

After Administrative Special Agent in Charge (ASAC) Carson Dunbar took over the FBI’s New York terrorism unit, he changed the conditions under which Salem was working, which alienated Salem, causing him to quit working undercover for the FBI.

The information that Salem had earlier provided proved to be reli-able. However, he did not want to have his name publicized by being called as a witness, and to undergo polygraph examinations. These conditions offended Salem and also threatened to expose him to retalia-tion, so he broke off the prior relationship. The prior agreement was for Salem to provide inside information for the FBI to then go and ob-tain the legally required evidence. Because Salem had relatives in Egypt, he feared that if his involvement with the FBI became known, his relatives would be in danger.

After severing connections with the FBI, Salem discovered that two of Yousef’s companions, Mahmud Abouhalima and Mohammed Salameh, were building a huge bomb. Salem alerted FBI Special Agent Floyd, advising that Abouhalima and Salameh be followed, which would take them to where the bomb was being fabricated (that later was put in the garage of one of the World Trade Center buildings). Dunbar blocked the previously assigned handlers, Anticev and Napoli, from following through. The huge urea-nitrate-fuel-oil bomb was then completed and taken into the World Trade Center underground parking, where it was detonated, resulting in over 100 injuries and deaths.

The Guilty Charging Floyd with Insubordination Possibly to protect his own incompetence, and discredit Floyd,

Dunbar charged FBI Special Agent Floyd with insubordination, result-ing in her suspension. That reminded me of what I endured when I sought to report, as a federal aviation safety agent, the hard-core viola-tions of major federal aviation safety requirements, falsification of re-cords, which were resulting in a continuing series of fatal airline crashes.

FBI Incompetents Rewarding FBI Incompetents While Floyd was suspended, Dunbar, whose incompetence made

possible the 1993 bombing of the WTC with its many deaths and inju-ries, received various promotions and financial rewards.

Yousef’s Subsequent Terrorist Schemes The night of the 1993 WTC bombing, Yousef fled to Pakistan on

Pakistan Airways. He then proceeded to Manila, where he and Abdul Hakim Murad produced bombs for placing on airliners and laid plans

DOJ’s Ripple Effect: 1993 WTC Bombing 85

for other terrorist activities. These plans included placing bombs on 11 U.S. airliners departing Far East locations.

Yousef fabricated a bomb device using a Casio databank watch to act as a timer, connected to a small battery, which would then set off the bomb.

The first test of the bomb mechanism was in a Manila movie thea-tre in December 1994. The device worked, exploding as planned, Within a couple of weeks, Yousef tested the bomb going through secu-rity at Manila Airport as he boarded a Philippine Airlines 747 flight from Manila to Cebu. Before he got off the plane at his destination, he set the timer on the bomb to go off during the next flight, which it did, when the aircraft was at 33,000 feet.

The explosion damaged the floor below the seat and killed a pas-senger. The aircraft itself did not explode, as Yousef had planned, and he planned to place the other bombs in seats directly over the center-wing fuel tank.

Fortunately, by accident, he never got to place any other bombs on the 11 aircraft that he had planned. During mixing of bomb chemicals in the Manila apartment he shared with Murad, an explosion and fire occurred. (January 6, 1995)

While neighbors called the fire department, Yousef and Murad fled. After the firemen left, Murad returned to the apartment to retrieve Yousef’s laptop computer that contained critical information on their bombing plans. Upon returning to the apartment, Murad was arrested by police. Yousef fled, catching a plane for Pakistan.

Revealing Past and Future Terrorist Activities Under intense questioning by the Philippine Police intelligence

unit, headed by Col. Rodolfo Mendoza, Murad revealed the activities and the plans of the terrorist cell. He identified Ramzi Yousef as the leader of the cell, the Bojinka scheme to down 11 U.S. airliners, and the plan to hijack U.S. airliners and fly them into major buildings in the United States, and the training of suicide bombers in U.S. flight schools.

Philippine Law Enforcement Provided Evidence of Planned Airline Hijackings Prior to 9/11 Col. Rodolfo Mendoza of the Philippines was able to discover from

Murad the details of the scheme that would unfold on September 11, 2001, along with details of other terrorist activities that had already oc-curred and those in the process.

It was learned that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Yousef were the masterminds of the scheme to hijack U.S. airliners and fly them into buildings in the United States. This information was turned over to U.S. authorities, and should have caused people in the govern-


ment’s aviation safety offices (FAA and NTSB) to finally order the simple and inexpensive measures that would have prevented years of hijackings throughout the world.

The primary measures would be insuring that the cockpit doors re-mained locked throughout the flight, and that the keys to the cockpit doors be removed from the cabin flight attendants. Almost any male can overpower a female flight attendant and grab the keys to the cock-pit (as probably happened on 9/11). None of the required measures to prevent hijackers from entering the cockpit were taken.

The many reports that I made while a federal aviation safety agent pertained to the simple and inexpensive measures necessary to prevent airlines from being hijacked. Instead of being adopted by FAA man-agement, I became the target of harassment and other punitive meas-ures for having made such reports.

Salem Provided Information Leading to Yousef’s Capture Salem, who was removed from providing information about the ter-

rorist cell prior to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, then provided information to FBI special agent Floyd about Yousef’s location in Paki-stan. With this information, Pakistani and U.S. personnel captured Yousef and returned him to the United States in 1995.

Terrorists Reunited in Metropolitan Correctional Center Ramzi Yousef was reunited with Abdul hakim Murad, Wali Khan,

and Eyad Ismoil in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York City, as they were waiting to go on trial for their role in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

Yousef and Murad were in separate prison cells separated by one occupied by Gregory Scarpa, Jr., a former member of the Colombo Ma-fia family in New York, who was also waiting to go on trial.

Scarpa and Yousef became acquainted, and Scarpa, seeking to gain Yousef’s confidence, claimed that he and his Mafia group were also interested in bringing down the government. Eventually, Yousef con-sidered Scarpa as a co-conspirator in the scheme to inflict harm upon government offices.

A practice developed wherein Yousef and Murad passed notes to each other through Scarpa’s cellblock. These notes, or “kites” as they were called, contained drawings for preparing bombs, drawing for bomb circuitry, for passing undetected through airport screening, for planned aircraft bombings, and other terrorist acts.

Scarpa’s attorney arranged with FBI officials for Scarpa to continue the process, promising Scarpa that the FBI would recommend a down-ward departure from whatever prison sentence arose from Scarpa’s


trial. This process was authorized by Federal Rules of Criminal Proce-dures 5K1.1.

As the relationship between Yousef and Scarpa continued, Scarpa offered to provide Yousef a confidential telephone link for Yousef to use in contacting his personnel outside of prison. Scarpa told Yousef to identify himself using a code word when contacting the Roma Corpora-tion—Scarpa’s alleged company—and that the operator at the company would then patch him into the phone number requested by Yousef. Roma was a fictitious company provided by the FBI for Scarpa, Jr. to offer to Yousef as a Mafia company willing to place phone calls any-where in the world.

The procedure for Yousef to make calls to the outside contacts via the fictitious Roma Corporation was for Yousef to dial the number of Roma and when the operator answered, to say that “Ronnie” was call-ing and that he wanted to make a call. The operator, an FBI employee, would then dial the number requested by Yousef and then listen in, re-cording the conversation.

One of the people Yousef talked to using the Roma Corporation third-party patch was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Shaikh Mohammed was one of the people involved in the Bojinka plot. He was believed located in Qatar on the Persian Gulf.

Yousef told Scarpa that Osama bin Laden was known as Bojinga, as distinguished from the scheme to place bombs on 11 airliners that was called Bojinka.

During one phone call through Roma Corporation, Yousef, talking in coded message, discussed the bombing of a U.S. airliner. A month later, TWA Flight 800 blew up shortly after taking off from New York’s JFK Airport.

Actual Blame for Downing of TWA Flight 800 A month before TWA went down, Yousef told Scarpa about plans

to bring down a U.S. airliner, along with plans and information that he provided to other members of al Qaeda about the composition of a bomb and how to get it smuggled past airport security. Evidence of ex-plosive material was found on parts of the TWA wreckage.

There is even more evidence that TWA Flight 800 was downed by a missile. I detail the evidence in several of my books, including the fourth edition of Unfriendly Skies and Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups. It is possible that the explosive residue found in the wreckage could come either from a missile explosion—or a bomb explosion.

Veiled Threat to Scarpa’s Family During one conversation with Scarpa, Jr. Yousef advised Scarpa

that his group had learned the location of Scarpa’s wife and children, and also that Yousef could poison Scarpa’s meals.


Trial of World Trade Center Bombings The trial on the planning Bojinka bombing started on May 25,

1996. Yousef and his co-conspirators were found guilty and U.S. Dis-trict Judge Kevin Thomas Duffy sentenced them to long prison terms, insuring that they would die in prison. The blame of Administrative Special Agent Carson Dunbar never surfaced during the trial.

Trial of Gregory Scarpa, Jr. and Betrayal by FBI Personnel The jury in the Scarpa trial found Scarpa guilty. The downward de-

parture recommendation that federal prosecutors had promised Scarpa for his work with the terrorists was denied. Federal prosecutors claimed that the information provided by Scarpa was a hoax, unreliable, and that Scarpa was not creditable.

U.S. District Judge Raggi agreed with the federal prosecutors and held that the confidential information Scarpa obtained from inside the cell responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the bomb-ing of a Philippine Airlines aircraft, the planned bombing of 11 U.S. airlines, and involvement in the 9/11 attacks, was not reliable and a hoax. Therefore, Scarpa did not merit a downward departure in the length of prison sentence.

Among the FBI memos that Raggi had to ignore was the following FBI 502, referring to what Scarpa relayed to the FBI:

Yousef told Scarpa I’ll teach you how to blow up airplanes and how to make bombs and then you can get the information to your peo-ple. Yousef told Scarpa I can show you how to get a bomb on an air-plane through a metal detector. Yousef told Scarpa he would teach him how to make a simple time device. Yousef told Scarpa that during the trial they had a plan to blow up a plane and hurt a judge or an attorney so a mistrial will be declared.

In December 1992—shortly before the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, over the protests of federal prosecutors, U.S. District Judge Raggi ordered DOJ personnel to return to Ajaj the terrorist and bomb-making manuals that were seized by U.S. Customs as Ajaj entered the United States with Ramzi Yousef.

“Important” Reason for Denying Scarpa’s Credibility There was an important reason—for FBI officials and federal

judges—to label Scarpa as not creditable, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Scarpa’s impending trial on RICO charges raised the defense that his criminal activities were known and sanc-tioned by FBI Supervising Agent Lindley DeVecchio and DeVecchio’s superiors in New York and Washington.

That defense, when it became known to defense lawyers for nu-merous mob figures, would result in overturning prior convictions and


also undermine pending prosecutions. It was therefore necessary to dis-credit anything that Scarpa Jr. stated, despite the adverse consequences upon national security and further terrorist attacks upon the United States.

Deception Relating to Scarpa Expanded to Threats Against Scarpa’s Mother and the Female Friend to Gregory Scarpa, Sr. The girlfriend of Gregory Scarpa Sr. was listed as a defense wit-

ness. She would testify with details of Scarpa Sr.’s relationship with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio. Scarpa Jr.’s mother also intended to testify in similar fashion. Theirs testimony would bolster the serious charges against FBI agent DeVecchio and the FBI and DOJ officials in Washington that approved the murderous actions.

DOJ prosecutors then told them that they would be prosecuted for various criminal offenses if they testified. Faced with prison, they were unable to testify at trial, increasing the possibility that the guilty FBI and DOJ officials would escape the consequences of their criminal acts.

The jury found Scarpa, Jr. guilty and Judge Raggi sentenced him to 40 years in prison.

Standard Practice of Rewarding Fraud Federal prosecutor Valerie Caproni had falsely labeled the informa-

tion that Scarpa obtained from Yousef as a hoax, helping to make pos-sible the events of 9/11 and the U.S. Embassy bombings. After the bun-gling, in 1998, the DOJ rewarded her with appointment to Chief of the Criminal Division in New York.

But the reward was of a different kind. It was a reward for discred-iting Scarpa, and thereby protecting the FBI’s involvement in murders in the New York area—similar to the DOJ and FBI cover-up and re-wards to FBI agents involved in decades of murders in the Boston of-fice.

In 2003, FBI Director Robert Mueller named her the FBI’s general counsel. In the book Defrauding America I describe Mueller’s cover-ups of criminal activities while he was with the FBI’s San Francisco office.

Another Example of FBI-DOJ Culture Contributed to 9/11 Former INS agent Joseph Occhipinti was a key figure in fighting

drug traffickers and drug cartels. He spent over 20 years with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, primarily in drug-related in-vestigations. During that time he earned over 70 commendations and awards, including three from the U.S. Attorney General. Because of his outstanding work, he was promoted to chief of the Anti-Smuggling unit for the New York City area. In that position he gained considerable knowledge about the operation of Dominican crime groups operating in the northeastern section of the United States. He would pay the price


for exposing corruption that involved drugs and politicians. Testimonial to Corrupt Politicians and DOJ Personnel As Occhipinti brought about the arrest of many politically con-

nected criminal elements, politicians and Justice Department personnel blocked further investigations and prosecutions. In addition, and work-ing in unison, all three groups retaliated against him and brought an end to his long and outstanding government career. His family suffered se-vere hardships, and Occhipinti ended up in prison for allegedly violat-ing the civil rights of drug traffickers—something that had never hap-pened before. His plight is another insight into the deeply entrenched corruption in U.S. politics and the Department of Justice.

Project Intercept One of several multi-agency task forces Occhipinti coordinated was

the 1987 operation called Project Intercept, and included personnel from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Port Authority Po-lice Department (PAPD), and the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-vice (INS). The purpose of bringing agents from the various agencies into one group was to coordinate their investigations, evidence, and prosecution of criminal activities.

That operation was credited with identifying Dominican drug lords and other ethnic organized crime groups that were involved in drug trafficking, money laundering, and alien smuggling activities at major New York airports. Occhipinti’s group had a high arrest and conviction rate and was so successful that Project Intercept became the subject of congressional hearings.

It was so successful that—after the politically powerful Domini-cans and drug traffickers complained—the INS District Director termi-nated it within a year of its startup. Occhipinti was then ordered to con-centrate instead upon filing reports against employers who hired illegal aliens, a group that did not have the political clout of the drug traffick-ers and the large Dominican population.

Project Resurrect Starting in 1988, Occhipinti coordinated another multi-agency un-

dercover operation called Project Resurrect, involving agents from the New York City district attorney’s office, Postal Inspection Service, and the U.S. Department of State. This project resulted in the successful prosecution and conviction of over two dozen Dominican organized crime figures in the New York City area.

The project exposed the role of a group known as the Federation of Dominican Merchants and Industrialists of New York, otherwise known as the Federation. This group operated bodegas, money transfer busi-nesses, travel agencies, boutiques, loan companies, and an assortment


of other businesses. (Bodegas is the term used by people in the Spanish community for grocery stores.) One of the people arrested and con-victed was a key member of the federation, Executive Board member Martha Lozano.

Discovering Theft Ring at JFK Airport One of Occhipinti’s investigations focused on a high-level smug-

gling operation at New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport. Due to a short-age of government agents, the Immigration and Naturalization Service hired private agencies to do some of its routine tasks. Wells Fargo was one of the companies hired, being responsible for placing illegal aliens—caught by INS agents—on board aircraft to be sent back to their country of origin. The company engaged in a “shell game” that protected illegal immigrants from being deported.

Corrupt employees of Wells Fargo developed a profitable scheme. When an illegal alien was arrested, his or her relatives would be con-tacted, and for a price, an impostor would replace the illegal alien. The impostor—who was legally in the United States—would be placed on board the aircraft and flown out of the United States. He or she would then fly back as a legal or documented alien. The illegal alien would meld into the community and most likely succeed in remaining in the United States.

Operation Red Eye In 1989, Occhipinti was involved in another multi-agency task

force called Operation Red Eye. It was composed of agents from the DEA, Port Authority, Amtrak Police Department, and INS. Its goal was to interdict at major New York City transportation centers illegal aliens smuggled into the United States via Mexico and the Canadian border.

The project was successful in apprehending alien drug couriers employed by the Dominican drug cartels and other ethnic crime groups. The operation was shut down when the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York (SDNY) complained that the interdiction stops were based on ra-cial profiling. It was irresponsible to shut down an operation aimed at Dominican crime groups when a large percentage of drug smugglers were Dominicans. But is what was done.

Over a period of time, Occhipinti felt that the U.S. Attorney’s office was not cooperating with the multi-agency task force and instead, actu-ally sabotaging their lawful operation, allowing large quantities of drugs to enter the United States.

Investigating Drug-Related Murder Exposed Other Crimes The murders (October 18, 1988) of two New York police depart-

ment (NYPD) officers, Michael Buczek and Christopher Hoban, in the Washington Heights section of New York City caused the police de-partment to ask for Occhipinti‘s assistance because of his expertise in


Dominican organized crime activities. (Washington Heights had turned into a major Dominican neighborhood where Dominican organized crime groups based many of their operations, and which had one of the highest homicide records. When I was growing up many years ago on the New Jersey side of the Hudson River across from Washington Heights, it was considered a desirable middle-class neighborhood.)

As a result of this investigation, the murderer was reported to be Dominican drug lord Daniel Mirabeaux.

During this investigation, Occhipinti discovered a major Domini-can drug operation controlled by Freddy Antonio Then, who estab-lished training camps in the Dominican Republic teaching people how to traffic in drugs. He reportedly smuggled these people into the United States from Mexico and then arranged for these aliens to be married to a U.S. citizen and thereby obtain permanent resident status with the arranged marriage.

Occhipinti learned that Then was buying local grocery stores, bo-degas, which were often used for various illegal activities, such as drug trafficking and drug money laundering. Occhipinti arrested Then sev-eral times on various charges, including illegal gun possession. Then’s prominence in the Dominican population and as a key member of the Federation would shortly be used against Occhipinti.

Project Bodega Another multi-agency task force, in which Occhipinti was in-

volved, in 1989, was called Project Bodega, and composed of agents from the DEA, Customs service, FBI, New York Police Department, Manhattan district attorney’s office, and INS. It investigated activities at the many bodegas in the New York City area where certain known criminal activities were prevalent.

Manhattan District Attorney Supported the Task Force Because of its many discoveries of criminal activities, the Manhatt-

an district attorney’s office was so pleased with the group’s work that it assigned several of its prosecutors, including John F. Kennedy, Jr., full time to prosecute the cases that were generated.

The task force discovered a widespread pattern of criminal activi-ties involving Middle East and Dominican groups in the New York-New Jersey area; some of them associated with bodega grocery stores operated mostly by Dominicans, Cubans, and Middle East people. Dur-ing consensual searches of bodegas, the task force discovered evidence of drug trafficking, drug money laundering, food stamp fraud, food coupon fraud, loan sharking, and smuggling of illegal aliens.


Involvement of CIA-Front Company: Sea Crest Trading Company Investigators discovered that many bodega activities involved Sea

Crest Trading Company, incorporated in Connecticut, with its main office in Greenwich, and another office in New York City. Closely tied to Sea Crest was Capital National Bank in New York, and included numerous CIA operatives from the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Sea Crest started operations in 1984, and during the 1980s and 1990s was extensively used by the CIA in various activities.

Years earlier, several of my CIA sources, primarily Gunther Russ-bacher, described Sea Crest and Capital National Bank as CIA-front companies and recipients of DOJ protections. The president of Capital National Bank, Carlos Cordoba, a Cuban national, was convicted in 1992 of bank fraud. Despite the seriousness of the offense, he received only a token probation sentence—which would be routine if the bank was in fact a front for the CIA.

A confidential source in the New York Police Department (NYPD) Special Investigations Unit uncovered evidence of arson and other criminal activities at Sea Crest, and that Sea Crest had key political connections that were protecting it against prosecution. As with other city, state and federal agents, he was intimidated and harassed by higher-ups. During the investigation, he discovered a conflict of interest between Christopher Lynn, a lawyer and member of the NYPD Civilian Complaint Review Board. Lynn defended those involved in Sea Crest’s illicit activities. The confidential source reported the disappearance of critical evidence on Sea Crest’s drug activities from the police depart-ment records.

An affidavit executed on March 1, 1994, by Domingo Antonio Lovera, described the growth of Sea Crest over the years in usurious loans, using Dominicans and Cubans to obtain and collect loans from bodega operators. Lovera described how Sea Crest used Capital Na-tional Bank to launder the money obtained from various illegal opera-tions. Investigations showed that this CIA-front company made a prac-tice of putting Dominicans into bodegas and then forcing them into various unlawful activities. Because of the high-interest and usurious loans (permitted where Sea Crest was incorporated Connecticut), and high monthly payments, bodega operators found they had to engage in criminal activities to keep from losing their businesses.

Sea Crest and Bodegas in Connecticut In a two-part series (August 1998), the Hartford Courant described

the activities of Sea Crest Trading Company, the Dominican-run bo-degas, and various criminal activities. The articles described drug deal-ers ducking into bodegas immediately after making drug sales and giv-


ing the cash to the bodega operators, and drugs being purchased from the operators. Quoting Hartford police Detective Robert Lawlor, “The bodegas provided a meeting place and the cover of a legitimate busi-ness. It hasn’t reached the point here that it has in New York, but it’s only a matter of time.”

The newspaper made reference to a 1997 classified report by the U.S. Department of Justice on Dominican drug trafficking and said dealers “move proceeds by disguising them in the financial records of travel agencies, boutiques, grocery stores and other Dominican-run businesses.” Despite the Justice Department’s knowledge of Sea Crest’s activities, the CIA-connected company appeared to have a get-out-of-jail card that kept them from being prosecuted, another sign of being a CIA-front or having CIA connections.

Dominican Revolutionary Party (PRD) Funding Presidential Candidates According to an article in Puerto Rico’s El Vocero newspaper, Do-

minican Revolutionary Party (PRD) members, including Simon Diaz and Pablo Espinal, contributed money to President Clinton’s reelection campaign during a fund-raiser at Coogan’s Irish Pub in New York’s Washington Heights. The article stated that this drug-tainted money was linked to the Dominican Revolutionary party. Vice President Al Gore posed for pictures with Diaz and Espinal. The article identified Simon Diaz as vice president of a New York City chapter of the PRD and that he was currently under investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and anti-narcotic agencies concerning PRD’s “alleged nexus with international drug cartels.”

Private Investigator Uncovers Similar Criminal Activities A concurrent investigation by a private investigator uncovered con-

siderable evidence of criminal activities at bodegas that the multi-agency task forces were discovering, especially as it related to food coupon fraud. Private investigator Ben Jacobsen, a retired New York detective, was working as chief investigator for the A.C. Nielson Cor-poration, which administered the food coupon program for many large companies selling to grocery stores. Corporations estimated that they were losing over $200 million a year in fraudulent coupon redemptions. Jacobsen‘s investigation uncovered canceled checks and other evidence showing Sea Crest Trading Company and one of its associate compa-nies, Control Book Keeping, to be behind this practice.

The food coupon fraud worked like this: People involved in the fraud brought into a central location newspapers and magazines con-taining food coupons that were intended to be used to purchase a par-ticular food item. The coupons were clipped, put into a barrel or some


other device that dirtied them to look like Customers had handled them. The coupons were then distributed to different bodegas that then sent them to coupon redemption centers. When the checks were sent to the grocers for these coupons, the checks were either endorsed over to Sea Crest Trading Company or cashed, and the money sent to Sea Crest. At the center of the scam was the CIA’s Sea Crest.

CIA Financing World Trade Center Bombing? Golden State News Service in New Jersey distributed to newspapers

(October 1995) the following interview with several key New York area law enforcement officers relating to the bombing of the World Trade Center:

The terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center was financed with drug and other racket money laundered and leveraged through small ethnic grocery stores. What’s more, terrorists even now are siphoning off more such funds. The real leader in the World Trade Center bombing has been allowed to flee capture, and all this is happening under the apparent protection of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Occhipinti says he and Jacobson, acting independently of each other, have tried repeatedly to interest various federal state and even local law enforcement authorities to follow through on inves-tigations of Sea Crest. “But always the investigations go nowhere.” Lenny Lemmer, a detective sergeant with the New York City Police Department, said recently in a sworn statement that he has encoun-tered similar dead-ends in probing Sea Crest and its alleged drug cartel connections.

Lemmer said he was called to meet several times with FBI agents and federal prosecutors, who tried to intimidate him into abandoning any leads he might uncover about Sea Crest or any-thing exculpatory about Occhipinti. Lemmer said he was aware of “concrete evidence” about alleged Sea Crest money laundering ac-tivities in Bogota, Colombia, and conveyed this information to an FBI agent.

In a recent interview, Jacobson confirmed that proceeds from coupon fraud paid for the World Trade Center bombing, and that Sea Crest had received redemption checks signed over by Middle Eastern and Dominican grocers suspected of participating in such fraud. The conspiracy is so loose that money may be siphoned off to terrorists without all parties involved in the original loan-shark-coupon scams being aware of it, according to investigators. Cover-up of Criminal Elements Related to WTC Bombing FBI Special Agent Lionel Baron of the FBI’s New York City terror-


ist unit obtained from Ben Jacobsen the names of his informants with the expressed intention of infiltrating Sea Crest. Despite receiving con-siderable evidence showing the criminal activities did exist, Baron and the FBI never went forward with any prosecution.

Lying by FBI Agents When New York Post reporter Al Guart requested access to Baron’s

investigative notes under the Freedom of Information Act, the FBI re-plied there were no notes and no investigation. This false statement by the FBI was made despite the fact that Baron had interviewed a number of witnesses, including Cesar Cabral, Hector Rodriguez, Alma Cama-rana, Peter Navaro, Luis Rodriguez, and Detective Raul Anglada, prov-ing that an investigation had been made. Rodriguez had even given a sworn affidavit to the FBI relating to a usurious loan from Sea Crest. Guart discovered many of the alias corporations used by Sea Crest.

Investigation of Sea Crest Blocked at All Levels Guart’s continuing investigation into Sea Crest’s activities, includ-

ing interviews with law enforcement agents, confirmed to him that in every case, investigations and prosecutions were blocked by high-level state and federal people. In Defrauding America and Drugging America I give numerous examples of this type of cover-up.

Guart interviewed Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferier re-garding Sea Crest’s operations in the Bronx with the intent of getting the Bronx district attorney to investigate the company. Ferier denied knowing anything about Sea Crest, but said he would set up an ap-pointment with the Bronx district attorney. When Guart conducted a Lexus check, he discovered a New York Times article (August 13, 1993) in which Ferier assisted Sea Crest in procuring a special ordinance to rebuild the building that had mysteriously burned in the Bronx. In the article, Ferier was quoted as referring to the president of Sea Crest, Mr. Berkovitz, as “my good friend Bernie.”

New York Post Cover-up of Covert Criminal Activities Guart prepared four news articles on Sea Crest which were to be

published, but weren’t, because his editor told Guart the newspaper was afraid to publish the articles. Earlier, when the New York Post ran a se-ries of articles, “The Framing of a Cop,” which made reference to bo-degas and Sea Crest, the newspaper received bomb threats and threats from the Dominican Federation that they would boycott the New York Post in the Washington Heights section of New York.

A DEA report (October 16, 1992) provided by Occhipinti alleged that Sea Crest was reportedly responsible for over $500 million in money laundering operations from the Washington Heights section of New York City.


The Federation The multi-agency task force discovered that members of the Fed-

eration were frequently involved in criminal activities, that major drug groups were using the federation businesses as fronts, and that the Fed-eration’s influence extended into political offices, including New York City Mayor David Dinkins. The Federation started putting pressure on political figures, seeking to disband the task forces led by Occhipinti.

Customs Investigation Halted by CIA Pressure A confidential source in the New York Police Department Intelli-

gence Unit knew about the Dominican Federation’s involvement in criminal activities following a prior joint investigation with U.S. Cus-toms (Customs Case # NY 02AR8NY003). Targets in that investigation included Pedro Allegria and Federation Vice President Erasmo Taveras, who had been indicted in 1989 and later convicted of a $70 million money laundering and loan sharking scheme. According to the confi-dential source, the CIA ordered Customs to drop the pending indict-ments against several of the Dominican drug traffickers, who then con-tinued to engage in money laundering activities—with the protection of the DOJ—despite evidence presented to the U.S. Attorney by Staten Island Borough President Guy Molinari in 1992.

Bergen County Investigation Halted Under-sheriff Jay Albert of the Bergen County, New Jersey, sheriff

department authorized a criminal investigation into Sea Crest and the Federation’s infiltration into that county. The investigation was turned over to detectives Juan Lopez and Wayne Yahn, who gathered evidence substantiating the involvement of Sea Crest and the Federation. Their investigation was terminated on the basis of an alleged jurisdictional dispute with the Bergen County prosecutor’s office.

Project Esquire: Investigating U.S. Attorney’s Office During the Project Bodega investigations the group discovered

from a police informant, Alma Camerena, that a former assistant U.S. Attorney and his law partner were allegedly part of Then’s drug cartel operations and involved in political corruption. According to Camerena, the former U.S. Attorney was attending sex and drug parties with his former colleagues in the U.S. Attorney’s office and receiving favored treatment in criminal cases involving his clients. Occhipinti said, “I found the allegations to be credible for a variety of reasons.”

Occhipinti reported these allegations to Assistant U.S. Attorney David Lawrence, who was the Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division, with whom Occhipinti had previously worked. Lawrence then arranged to debrief Camerena. After questioning Camerena, and determining that the charges were true, instead of addressing the matter, Project Esquire was terminated.


Search of Dominican Bodegas Occhipinti‘s task force had multiple investigations going simulta-

neously. Focusing on the criminal activities in the bodegas, the task force sought additional court-admissible evidence by conducting con-sensual searches of several dozen bodegas in the Washington Heights section during the last half of 1989 and early 1990. In conducting con-sensual searches, the owner or operator is asked to sign a consent form agreeing to have their properties searched. Otherwise, a search warrant must be obtained.

In one search of the Then’s Brothers Grocery Store, the task force discovered $131,000 in cash bundles destined for Sea Crest. This money was later judicially forfeited as drug proceeds by the U.S. Dis-trict Court in Manhattan. In another bodega owned by Richard Knip-ping in the Bronx, the task force discovered hundreds of newly issued government food stamp books. Knipping could provide no explanation for how he acquired them.

These seizures and related criminal charges started major retalia-tion efforts against Occhipinti by various members of the Federation, Dominican criminal cartels, the black Mayor, David Dinkins, and the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York City.

Drug Smugglers & Immigrants Reacted with Demonstrations The politically powerful Dominican drug traffickers, the Federa-

tion, and Mayor David Dinkins orchestrated demonstrations against Occhipinti in the drug-infested Washington Heights area of Manhattan. Rather than support the head of the multi-agency task force, Project Bodega was terminated, despite the heavy concentration of drug and other criminal activities discovered during the bodega searches. Drug trafficking then escalated.

Using Clinton’s Tactics: Blame the Republicans Mayor Dinkins issued a statement claiming the search of the bo-

degas was a “Republican Conspiracy” intended to sabotage the 1990 census and intimidate immigrant voters from going to the polls. Dinkins was referring to the large numbers of illegal aliens in the area, many of whom voted for him in the prior election that resulted in the slim majority that won him the election.

What Dinkins was probably afraid of was that the increased police activities would keep illegal aliens from the voting booths where he had a large following in the Dominican community. Dominicans constitute a large voting block in the New York and other urban areas in the Northeast. Figures indicate there were over half a million Dominicans in New York City alone, and that they would outnumber all other His-


panic groups within a few years. Dinkins had been receiving large con-tributions from the Federation and the Dominican crime figures, being another reason for wanting to shut down the investigation of criminal activities involving mostly Dominicans.

Consensual Searches Violated Their Civil Rights? The Federation, the immigrants, the drug traffickers, and Mayor

Dinkins claimed that the searches violated the civil rights of the bodega operators. They focused their charges against Occhipinti, even though he was only one member of the task force. It was necessary to focus the attacks on one individual in order for the planned scheme to succeed.

The group pressured the U.S. Attorney to file criminal charges against Occhipinti for violating their civil rights on the basis that the signing of the consensual forms occurred after their bodegas were searched, thereby violating their civil rights. This charge had never been done before against a government agent on the basis of an alleged technical violation.

Several members of the multi-agency task force told the U.S. At-torney that there were no violations of anyone’s civil rights during the task force’s search of the bodegas. IRS Special Agent Ronald Nowicki was present during the search of Knipping’s bodega and stated there were no violations of search procedures. DEA agent John Dowd was also present during the search of Knipping’s bodega and stated that the search was legal. But this wasn’t what the DOJ prosecutors wanted to hear.

Reporting Threats Against Occhipinti to U.S. Attorney Alma Camarena, the legal secretary in the law offices of former

AUSA Jorge Guttlein, and Andres Aranda, overheard the lawyers dis-cussing ways to eliminate the threat that Occhipinti posed to their Do-minican and drug trafficking clients. Upon hearing these threats, Cama-rena went to the U.S. Attorney’s office to report what she heard, and was interviewed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeh Johnson.

Camarena said, “Mr. Aranda told Mr. Guttlein that he would like to have Mr. Occhipinti eliminated.” Camarena added that Guttlein didn’t like that idea and said he would think up another plan. After she gave this information to the U.S. Attorney’s office, Johnson, or someone else in the U.S. Attorney’s office, gave this confidential information, and the name of the confidential witness, to Camarena’s boss, who was the tar-get of the charges!

U.S. Attorney Protecting Drug Cartels and Terrorists Instead of protecting a respected government agent who was bring-

ing about the arrest of people subverting major national interests, the U.S. Attorney filed criminal charges against Occhipinti. Those charges were based upon the perjured statements of the bodega operators—


most of who were engaging in criminal activities and who were con-tinuing their unlawful activities.

The Department of Justice indictment charged Occhipinti with fail-ure to obtain written consent of the bodega operators before searching the premises, relying upon their verbal consent. They also claimed that Occhipinti kept money seized by the task force group (During trial, the jury held him not guilty of that charge, and at a later date some of the bodega operators who made that charge admitted that they lied.)

This was the same U.S. Attorney’s office that had been covering up for the criminal activities that Occhipinti and his task force had been exposing. It was the same office that had covered up for the CIA-Mafia drug trafficking reported by one of their own FBI agents, Richard Taus, during this same time period, which is described in Defrauding Amer-ica.

Peculiar Comparisons Compare these civil rights “violations” with the common practice

of DEA and ATF agents breaking down the doors to peoples’ homes, throwing the residents to the floor, shoving loaded pistols in their faces, and occasionally shooting and killing innocent people. These agents have the full support of the Department of Justice and federal judges. But when a federal agent exposed powerful drug traffickers with politi-cal and connections to CIA operations and terrorists, DOJ officials and federal judges attacked the government agent.

Withholding of Exculpatory Evidence by DOJ Prosecutors Transcripts of the grand jury proceedings showed DOJ witnesses

lying when they testified they did not have prior criminal records. DOJ prosecutors withheld this perjury from the grand jury members and from the defense during the Occhipinti trial. Also withheld from the grand jury and jury trial was the fact that the task force had discovered contraband and illegal activity at each of the locations that they searched.

Black Activist Federal Judge with Strong Ties to Democratic Mayor Dinkins and the Federation Selected to be the judge for Occhipinti‘s trial was U.S. District

Judge Constance Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and who had a radical and biased reputation. Federal court procedures require assignment of judges to a particular criminal trial be done on a normal rotation process, and is normally done by the court clerk. Judge Motley was pre-selected instead of chosen at ran-dom. Occhipinti said U.S. Attorney Jeh Johnson’s face reflected joy and he gave a “thumbs-up” sign when Judge Motley’s name was announced as being the trial judge.


Motley had close political ties to black mayor of New York City, David Dinkins. She was a protégé of Raymond Jones, a powerful black leader of Tammany Hall who was also an associate of David Dinkins in the Harlem Carver Democratic Club.

A Mafia Don would Have Been Pleased with That Lineup A New American article (February 21, 1994) stated that during

Motley’s Senate confirmation hearings, evidence was presented show-ing Motley to be an ardent Young Communist League organizer who established student cells at New York University. The records showed that Constance Baker, her maiden name, was training for the Red Un-derground. Despite this record, Senator Edward Kennedy nominated Motley to become America’s first black female federal judge, and other senators, wanting to get as many of the black votes as possible, quickly endorsed her.

The prosecutor, Jeh Johnson, was a former law clerk for the judge, and it was said that he was her “Godson.” The article raised another problem that should have been the basis for changes in the trial setting:

There was bad blood between [Johnson] and Occhipinti as a result of the Project Esquire investigation of corruption within [Johnson’s] office. Further, some of Johnson’s associates alleged that he had boasted that an Occhipinti conviction would land him a high-paying private sector job-a prediction that was fulfilled. Today, Johnson’s of-fice walls at the prestigious New York law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton and Garrison are adorned with artists’ renderings of the Oc-chipinti trial, which Johnson regards as “trophies.”

Record of Overturned Decisions Judge Motley had more decisions overturned on appeal than any

other judge in that circuit, indicating she was either legally ignorant, contemptuous of the law, or rendering decisions based on personal in-terests or money under the table.

Pre-Trial Problems for Occhipinti Making matters worse for Occhipinti, his lawyer, Norman Mord-

kofsky, was suffering a nervous breakdown. The heavy media publicity and street demonstrations, and the loss of his legal practice, caused the trial lawyer to suffer severe stress before the trial. Occhipinti sought substitution of another legal counsel. Mordkofsky explained his serious problems to Judge Motley and filed a motion to be excused so that Oc-chipinti could obtain another lawyer. Judge Motley denied the request, calling the lawyer a liar. Occhipinti ended up with inadequate legal rep-resentation.

A week earlier, New York Supreme Court Judge Anthony Scarpino removed Mordkofsky from a murder case because of his bizarre behav-ior. The judge publicly admitted that there was no question that Mord-


kofsky was suffering some kind of psychological problem. After Oc-chipinti‘s trial, the lawyer was admitted to a hospital for psychiatric care. In one letter to me, Occhipinti wrote:

During my trial, he talked about committing suicide on several occasions. Judge Motley demanded that he go to trial. On the trial records, Mordkofsky demonstrates before the jury bizarre behavior as well as his failure to call very much needed defense witnesses or go through the counts of the indictment. It was also determined that his breakdown was attributed to the termination of his law practice.

His two partners were criminal defense lawyers who repre-sented many Dominican organized crime figures I was investigat-ing, including some of Freddy Then’s drug associates. Clearly, I had won several crucial criminal cases which made Mordkofsky’s two partners look bad. Another important fact I later learned that Mordkofsky’s next-door neighbor was a lawyer who incorporated many of the Dominican Bodegas with suspected ties to the Federa-tion and Sea Crest.

In fact, it was this very same lawyer who represented the Then Brothers grocery store on the $131,000 forfeiture case. I truly be-lieve that there was immense pressure on Mordkofsky, which re-sulted in his nervous breakdown. There are medical and hospitali-zation records to document this breakdown. DOJ Prosecutor Threatening Witnesses The Justice Department’s prosecutor threatened witnesses who

wanted to testify on Occhipinti‘s behalf. Occhipinti explained: The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which provided the

staff for the multi-agency task force, included three Assistant dis-trict attorneys and a team of investigators. They wanted to testify on my behalf. They knew the project was lawful and had proper predication. In fact, Ann Rudman, chief of the Asset Forfeiture Pro-gram, tried to convince INS not to close down the project.

Yet, these district attorney officials never came forward. Ac-cording to Jacobson and others, the Manhattan district attorney’s office was threatened by SDNY prosecutors that if they came to my aid, they might subject themselves to federal prosecution since they jointly worked on the task force with me.

Also, in the documented setup of another NYPD police officer, Louis Dellapizzi, on fabricated civil rights charges, Lawyer Andres Aranda was never indicted for the setup because of reported influ-ence by SDNY prosecutors. If Aranda had been indicted, many sus-pect that as part of a plea-bargain deal, he would have confirmed


my setup and exposed the official corruption at the US Lawyer’s of-fice.

Common Judicial Chicanery During the trial, Judge Motley refused to allow the defense to in-

troduce information about the criminal background of the Dominicans witnesses who claimed Occhipinti violated their civil rights, despite the fact that this information was relevant to assess the witnesses’ credibil-ity. Motley made numerous rulings that kept any information about CIA and criminal activities from being heard by the jurors.

DOJ Withholding Exculpatory Evidence Many of the bodega operators who filed civil rights complaints

against Occhipinti were suspected of dealing in food coupon fraud or drug activities, and continued to be suspected of violations after the trial had ended. This information was known to the prosecutor who unlawfully withheld the information throughout the trial proceedings. Federal law requires that the prosecutor provides the defense with all exculpatory evidence known to the prosecutor; this requirement is rou-tinely violated by the Justice Department lawyers, who never suffer any retaliation for it.

Prosecutorial Deception There were numerous prosecutorial errors before and during trial,

all intended to insure that the jury decide Occhipinti to be guilty. To obtain the indictment from the federal grand jury, U.S. Attorney John-son withheld exculpatory evidence and made inflammatory statements against Occhipinti. The prosecutor threatened and intimidated wit-nesses who would be testifying in Occhipinti’s defense. One official with the NYPD admitted to Jacobsen that NYPD officers involved in Project Bodega were being threatened with indictment if they came to Occhipinti’s defense.

Outraged Lawyer Filed Court Affidavit During the trial, lawyer Angel Nunez, who had been observing the

proceedings, became outraged by the prosecutorial and judicial mis-conduct, and submitted an affidavit into court records detailing the nu-merous trial irregularities. Nunez interviewed those who filed the com-plaint against Occhipinti, and in 55 undercover taped conversations they admitted the searches were legal in their estimation, contradicting their grand jury and trial testimony.

Nunez tried to submit an affidavit into the trial relating to these findings, showing a conspiracy against Occhipinti and that the wit-nesses were lying. Judge Motley refused the request. When Nunez tried to admit the tapes and transcripts into the hearing, the judge again refused, compounding her refusal by seizing the tapes, thereby prevent-


ing them from being used elsewhere. When the judge heard that Oc-chipinti reported these irregularities to the media, she put a “gag order” on Occhipinti, preventing him from speaking out, another unconstitu-tional act.

The jurors from the area that Occhipinti‘s group had targeted handed down a guilty verdict against Occhipinti on June 12, 1992, on the charge of conspiracy to violate the civil rights of the bodega opera-tors.

First Law Enforcement Officer Sentenced To Prison for Alleged Technical Error Never before in American history had a federal law enforcement

officer been criminally prosecuted in a case where there was no vio-lence involved and where the officer had done a routine consensual search, and merely involved an “alleged” technical violation. Even if, for argument, Occhipinti, a key agent in U.S. Immigration and Natu-ralization Service, had actually violated some technical search proce-dure that would not subject the officer to prison. Instead, the evidence obtained in a faulty manner would be excluded and administrative ac-tion possibly taken against the officer. It had always been, and still is, government policy to conduct an administrative hearing, and certainly not file criminal charges. The FBI never conducted any hearing. The question is, why did the Department of Justice file the sham charges?

Ending a Successful Drug-Fighting Career Judge Motley sentenced Occhipinti to 37 months in a maximum-

security prison where Occhipinti would be surrounded by convicted drug dealers that he helped put in prison. This same tactic was used to eliminate other witnesses against government corruption.

Justice Department Retaliating Against FBI Supervisor FBI Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the New York office, Jim

Fox, had replied to media questions, stating the FBI had evidence showing Occhipinti was innocent of the charges and that the govern-ment was withholding the evidence. In retaliation, the FBI suspended him—two months prior to his planned retirement.

Occhipinti filed a motion for a new trial, based upon Fox’s state-ments, but Judge Motley denied the motion. (Fox died of cancer in 1998.)

Fallout From Justice Department’s Conduct There were several consequences to the Justice Department’s

charges against Occhipinti: • Government agents were put on notice not to go after politically

connected criminal elements in the Dominican community. • Caused other government agents to ignore politically connected


criminal activities. • Established an “acceptable” procedure for retaliating against gov-

ernment agents who threaten politically connected criminals. • Emboldened larger and well-connected drug traffickers to continue

or escalate their criminal activities, knowing they would be pro-tected by DOJ personnel. Small-time drug traffickers, with no po-litical or CIA connections, would receive DOJ attention.

• Protected Jersey City terrorists who received some of their funding from the drug activities that Occhipinti was targeting. These were the terrorists who later bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. Another DOJ Contributions to Increased Crime Activities A 1993 report by the president of the New Jersey Police Benevo-

lent Association said that in the year before Occhipinti’s conviction the local Drug Enforcement Agency conducted 2,700 investigations, and that the year after Occhipinti’s conviction, that number dropped to 500. The reason given was that agents feared being sent to prison for carry-ing out their drug investigations.

The president of the New York-New Jersey Port Authority Police Union said that their officers had ceased all consensual searches and drug interdiction activities in the ports of New York and New Jersey, out of fear of being charged with civil rights violations (of politically-connected criminal groups).

Sgt. Lenny Lemer of the NYPD-DEA drug task force gave testi-mony to Congress stating that during a 1992 criminal investigation they discovered evidence at Sea Crest of a conspiracy against Occhipinti. The U.S. Attorney’s office in New York ordered Lemer to remain silent about this information, giving the sham excuse that there was an ongo-ing investigation. The Justice Department prosecutors chose to use the obviously biased statements from major drug traffickers over the state-ments of any of the government agents.

Threat of Violence by Ethnic Groups Affected Appeal Process With a new lawyer, Stephen Frankel, Occhipinti appealed his con-

viction. Oral arguments were scheduled (June 1992) at the Second Cir-cuit Court of Appeals and included in the appeal issues was the ineffec-tive assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and judicial errors. The appeal brief and appendix exceeded 750 pages.

Trying to intimidate the judges, the Dominican Federation staged a noisy demonstration in front of the courthouse. The noisy group carried signs warning of riots in Washington Heights if Occhipinti‘s trial deci-sion was overturned, and then packed an overflowing courtroom where oral arguments were heard.


Often, appellate court judges take weeks or even months before they issue a decision after an oral hearing, but in Occhipinti‘s case, the decision was rendered within one hour of the hearing, quieting the Do-minican immigrants, drug traffickers and bodega operators.

Risks in Prison His appeal rejected, Occhipinti was ordered to turn himself in on

June 12, 1992. The day before he was to turn himself in, Occhipinti appeared on a New York television show, the “Jackie Mason Show,” explaining what really happened. Judge Motley retaliated, ordering the U.S. Marshal to immediately arrest Occhipinti. The marshal ignored her order and told Occhipinti to surrender the next morning. As is cus-tomary, Occhipinti was placed in leg irons and body chains and sent by prison plane to El Reno, Oklahoma. The greater distance from New York insured he would have difficulty getting publicity or using other legal remedies.

Recognized by Prisoners He Previously Arrested As Occhipinti entered the general prison population at El Reno,

Oklahoma, he was recognized by some of the prisoners from New York whose incarceration came about as a result of Occhipinti’s task force. Fortunately, sympathetic prison guards, made aware of the risk, put Occhipinti into solitary confinement. While this protected him from physical harm, the isolation resulted in a breakdown. DOJ prison offi-cials blocked every attempt by Occhipinti to be transferred closer to his family, realizing that he and his supporters would be working to bring about his release and publicize the misconduct by Justice Department prosecutors.

Many People Protested the Outrage and DOJ Protection of Politically Connected Criminals Many courageous people expressed outrage at sentencing Occhip-

inti to prison for having reported the criminal activities in the New York area. Staten Island Borough President, Guy V. Molinari, heard about Occhipinti‘s plight, and even though Occhipinti was not one of his con-stituents, Molinari started an investigation, acquiring several affidavits from key people that proved Occhipinti’s innocence.

FBI Trying to Set Up Borough President Molinari Molinari’s actions seeking to reveal the truth behind the DOJ’s

prosecution of Occhipinti started an all-too-common DOJ retaliation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Valerie Capone and FBI Special Agent Jarrett investigated Molinari’s staff on the excuse the evidence the staff had uncovered was fabricated. Capone also threatened NYPD Detective Lemmer with potential prosecution for providing Molinari with excul-patory evidence relating to the Occhipinti setup and cover-up of crimi-


nal activities in the New York area. The DOJ, through its FBI agents, then tried to entrap Molinari, us-

ing a woman wearing a wire-recorder, seeking to trap him with false charges. They also charged Molinari with compensating a person for giving testimony.

Media Reference to FBI Setup of Molinari An article in the New York Post (April 26, 1995) made reference to

the misuse of the FBI’s powers against Molinari: “Guy Molinari Fumes: FBI tried to set me up.” The article stated in part:

Staten Island Borough President Guy Molinari angrily charged yesterday that two FBI agents sought to entrap him in a criminal scheme with the help of a “wired” government informant. “It’s out-rageous,” Molinari said. “If they will do this to me, an elected offi-cial, I hate to think what they might do to a member of the general public.”

Molinari came under FBI scrutiny during his relentless efforts to prove the innocence of Joseph Occhipinti, the Immigration and Naturalization officer who was convicted and imprisoned on charges of conducting illegal searches of drug locations in upper Manhattan. Occhipinti, the most decorated officer in INS history, served seven months of a 37-month prison term before President Bush commuted the sentence, principally at Molinari’s behest.

Molinari, who had never heard of Occhipinti, became involved only two days before the agent was sentenced. He was so appalled at what he saw at the sentencing that he and his staff launched an independent probe. Molinari concluded that Occhipinti had been framed and convicted on the perjured testimony of drug dealers. Molinari’s efforts on behalf of the beleaguered agent—who is not even a constituent—are among his finest hours in a long career of public service. But those efforts started his problem with the FBI.

“When a small team of FBI agents working out of Queens ar-rived at my office, it became clear to me that the focus of their in-vestigation was not the evidence we had produced but the involve-ment of me and my office in the matter.” Molinari told me yester-day. “Here was I, a law-abiding citizen, seeking to redress what I believed to be a miscarriage of justice, and finding that I had be-come the target of the FBI probe. They tried to get me to commit a crime. It’s outrageous.”

Molinari’s evidence against the FBI includes a sworn affidavit from Alma Camarena, a former law clerk who first informed the government that Dominican drug lords were planning to frame Oc-chipinti. In the affidavit, Camarena swears: On or about January or February of 1993, I was contacted by [an


FBI] agent to come to their office in Queens. I agreed. At that in-terview, they said that they wanted me to set up Mr. Molinari by my wearing a wire against him. I said, “Yes only because I was afraid.”

Camarena said she overheard the agents planning the operation. “They were bragging how they would get a helicopter to circle Mr. Molinari’s office to overhear my conversation with him,” she swore. “They said when Mr. Molinari agreed to get me a job on the wire, they would arrest him.”

Camarena said she called Molinari, but “I never said what the FBI wanted me to say. The FBI agents appeared upset because I didn’t repeat everything they wanted.”

Molinari told the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility that the agents seemed more interested in investigating him than in the criminal conspiracy or the perjury against Occhipinti. Drug Dealers, Immigrants, and DOJ Personnel In Conspiracy Against Law Enforcement Officers Molinari articulated this fact from looking at the Occhipinti case as

he said: The Occhipinti case is very significant. It is part of a new phe-nomenon in which law-enforcement officers are being convicted on the perjured testimony of drug dealers. Complaining to FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility Molinari complained to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsi-

bility (OPR) about the scheme to file false charges against him. Almost a year later, the FBI responded:

There is insufficient evidence to find that the allegations made by you and supported by Alma Camarena are substantiated. While it appears that on August 28, 1992, the agents discussed with Cama-rena the possibility of her wearing a wire in some type of cover ac-tion against you, and that she agreed to do so, the idea was not en-dorsed by the agents’ supervisor and was flatly rejected by Depart-ment of Justice lawyers. President George Bush Sr. Pardons Occhipinti After acquiring considerable evidence and affidavits clearly show-

ing how drug traffickers and DOJ personnel set up Occhipinti, Molinari requested President George Bush to commute Occhipinti’s sentence. Other concerned people also contacted Bush. On January 15, 1993, shortly before Bush left office, he signed a commutation for Occhipinti.


However, he refused to give Occhipinti a full pardon, which left Oc-chipinti with a felony conviction. During the 1980s, Bush was heavily involved in CIA activities in which Sea Crest played an important role. Bush was also involved in or knew of other CIA activities, some of it being drug trafficking, especially during the Contra affair.

Continuing to Expose Criminal Activities Upon Release After Occhipinti was released from prison as a private citizen, he

presented evidence concerning many criminal activities to various law enforcement agencies that had jurisdiction and responsibilities in those areas. During a February 2, 1993, meeting in the office of the Bronx district attorney to discuss Sea Crest and Dominican crime activities, attended by district attorney personnel, Occhipinti described the evi-dence that the task force group had acquired. Before leaving, an un-named investigator privately told Occhipinti that no investigation would be conducted because of the high political links to the CIA and Dominican organized crime operations.

Brooklyn District Attorney Drops Investigation Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hines had meetings with Oc-

chipinti in 1993 concerning the evidence Occhipinti’s group had ac-quired, which was in his jurisdiction and area of responsibility. Hines stated he would authorize an investigation into Sea Crest. But that in-vestigation never occurred.

Bronx DA Halts Investigation During a January 12, 1994, meeting with Assistant District Attor-

ney Edward Friedenthal in the Bronx, Friedenthal told Occhipinti that an investigation would be conducted into Sea Crest, based upon infor-mation provided by Occhipinti’s task force. No investigation occurred.

New Jersey Investigation Halted A conference took place on July 21, 1994, with Sgt. Jim Mulhol-

land of the New Jersey Police intelligence unit, Occhipinti, and several high-ranking deputy attorney generals from New Jersey, which was arranged by former New Jersey Attorney General Robert Del Tufo. A week earlier, on July 13, 1994, Occhipinti and several New York City law enforcement agents testified before the New Jersey Senate about Dominican organized crime operations in New Jersey. New Jersey law enforcement personnel planned to act upon the information, until Jus-tice Department personnel contacted them.

Postal Service and ATF Cover-Up Federal agents from the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Al-

cohol Tobacco and Firearms Bureau interviewed Occhipinti in Decem-ber 1994 concerning these criminal activities. According to a confiden-tial source, Postal inspectors and the Organized Crime Strike Force for Newark, New Jersey, had indicated an interest in Sea Crest Trading


Company, but the investigation was also stopped. Congressman Traficant Seeking Congressional Hearing Complaints of the criminal activities and government cover-ups

were brought to Representative James Traficant’s attention. He ob-tained a confidential June 1992 DEA report that corroborated reports of a special interest group protecting Sea Crest corrupt activities. The DEA report said that Sea Crest laundered over 500 million dollars a year from Washington Heights.

Traficant placed into the Congressional Record (September 27, 1996) affidavits and other evidence showing the existence of the CIA and Dominican drug offenses in the United States. He also referenced Justice Department’s actions blocking the exposure of these activities. Traficant would later become targeted by Justice Department prosecu-tors and forced out of office by his imprisonment.

Dominican Diplomat Confirming Dominican Criminal Activities Ramon Antonio Grullon, a former Dominican diplomat, prepared

two affidavits on March 10, 1994, that were entered into the Congres-sional Record by Traficant. In the affidavits, Grullon said he had been recruited by Federation members Pedro Allegria and others to partici-pate in a conspiracy against Occhipinti, and that the motive for these acts against Occhipinti was Occhipinti’s investigation of Sea Crest and the Federation’s bodegas. Grullon described the criminal activities of Sea Crest and the involvement of Richard Knipping and Jose Liberato in the illicit operations. Grullon also described being present when drug money was given to certain elected officials.

Congressional Resolution That Went Nowhere A resolution was entered into the Congressional Record on April

28, 1993, by Representative Dick Zimmer seeking the appointment of a special or independent prosecutor to investigate the matters that Oc-chipinti discovered. The resolution stated in part:

Whereas, there is voluminous evidence that in 1991 and 1992 Mr. Occhipinti may have been the target of a well orchestrated con-spiracy by Dominican drug dealers, leading to his prosecution on civil rights charges under 18 U.S.C.§§ 241 and 242; (1)

This House memorializes the President and Congress of the United States to appoint a special or independent prosecutor to in-vestigate the case of Mr. Joseph Occhipinti, including an investiga-tion of the alleged drug cartel conspiracy against Mr. Occhipinti, and, further, of the alleged Justice Department cover-up in the han-dling and prosecution of the Occhipinti case. The President is me-morialized further to grant, if the investigation warrants, a full par-


don so Mr. Occhipinti can clear his name. This House further memorializes the President and Congress of

the United States to seek a congressional investigation examining the extent of Dominican crime operations in the United States es-pecially in New Jersey. Congress Unwillingness to Offend Dominican Constituency Despite the gravity of the criminal activities in the New York area

uncovered by the various law enforcement agencies, and despite the obstruction of justice activities by DOJ personnel, few in Congress wanted to investigate the problems. Some were covering up for the Jus-tice Department and others were too scared and cowardly. An investiga-tion would alienate the large Dominican political constituency.

A full investigation would reveal, for instance, the decades of CIA drug trafficking; drug money going to both political parties; the most recent examples of drug money going to the Democratic party and President Bill Clinton.

Seeking Congressional Relief for Occhipinti Further information supporting Occhipinti’s innocence and the

DOJ-organized crime coalition against him was provided by an affida-vit placed into the Congressional Record (E1734) on September 27, 1996, by William Acosta, which stated in part:

(2) I am former thirteen-year law enforcement official who suc-cessfully infiltrated the Medellin and Cali Colombian drug cartels. I am considered an expert on the Colombian and Dominican drug and money laundering operations in the New York City area.

[Political Corruption Involving John F. Kennedy] (3) In 1987, I was previously employed as an undercover op-

erative for the United States Customs Service, wherein I was as-signed to route out corruption at John F. Kennedy International Airport. In 1987, I was the principle undercover agent on “Opera-tion Airport 88,” which resulted in the prosecution and conviction of seventeen government officials for bribery corruption and re-lated criminal charges. I was then promoted to Special Agent and reassigned to the Los Angeles District Office.

[Evidence of New York City Police Corruption] (4) In 1990, I was appointed to the New York City Police De-

partment as a Police officer. In view of my Colombian heritage and confidential sources close to the Colombian cartel, I was eventually assigned to the Internal Affairs Unit. During my undercover activ-ity, I generated evidence of police corruption for the Deputy Com-missioner of Internal Affairs, which was later corroborated by the “Mollen Commission” hearings, which investigated police corrup-


tion. [Drug Cartel Conspiracy Against Occhipinti] (5) On January 14, 1992, Manuel De Dios, a close personal

friend and world-renown journalist executed the attached notarized affidavit, wherein, Mr. Dios corroborated the existence of a drug cartel conspiracy against Mr. Occhipinti. The orchestrators of the conspiracy were major Dominican organized crime figures con-nected with the “Dominican Federation” which is the front for the Dominican drug cartel. The Federation are the principle drug dis-tributors in the United States for the Colombian cartel. Unfortu-nately, Mr. De Dios was assassinated before he could bring for-ward his sources who could prove the drug cartel conspiracy against Mr. Occhipinti. After Mr. De Dios’ assassination, I too be-came fearful of my personal safety and never made public the evi-dence on the Occhipinti case.

[Corroborating the Federal Conspiracy] (6) It should be noted that I personally assisted Mr. De Dios in

this investigation of the Occhipinti case, which corroborated the Federation conspiracy. In fact, I personally accompanied Mr. De Dios to the Washington Heights area where we secretly taped re-corded Federation members who confirmed the drug cartel con-spiracy. Those tapes still exist and can exonerate Mr. Occhipinti. In essence, Mr. Occhipinti was set up because of his increased en-forcement efforts on Project Bodega which was exposing and hurt-ing the Dominican Federation’s criminal operations in New York City, which included illegal wire transfers, drug distribution, gam-bling operations, food stamp fraud, food coupon fraud, among other organized crime activity.

[Criminals Protected by High-Level Government Officials] (7) My investigation also determined that Mr. Occhipinti was

exposing a major money laundering and loan sharking operation relating to the Federation, which was controlled by the Sea Crest Trading Company, of Greenwich, Connecticut. Sea Crest also maintains an office at 4750 Bronx River Parkway in the Bronx, New York.

Sea Crest was using the Capital National Bank in order to fa-cilitate their money laundering operations. In 1993, Carlos Cor-doba, the President of Capital National Bank was convicted in Fed-eral Court at Brooklyn, New York for millions of dollars in money laundering and he received a token sentence of probation. My investigation confirmed that Sea Crest, as well as the Dominican Federation, are being politically protected by high-ranking public


public officials who have received illegal political contributions, which were drug proceeds. In addition, the operatives in Sea Crest were former CIA Cuban operatives who were involved in the “Bay of Pigs.” This is one of the reasons why the intelligence community has consistently protected and insulated Sea Crest and the Domini-can Federation from criminal prosecution.

[Dominicans and Colombians Partners in Drug Activities] (8) At present, there are nine major Colombian drug families,

which control drug operations in the New York City area. These drug families often referred to as the “Nine Kings.” The Dominican Federation are part of their drug trafficking and money laundering operations. I possess documentary evidence, as well as video sur-veillance tapes of their drug operations. In addition, the New York City Police has investigative files to corroborate this fact.

I have also uncovered substantial evidence of political and po-lice corruption, which has been intentionally ignored. In fact, it is my belief that former New York City Police Internal Affairs Com-missioner Walter Mack, who I directly worked for, was intentionally fired because of his efforts to expose police corruption. I plan to make public this evidence to the United States Congress, as well as key members of the media in order to preserve this evidence in the event I am assassinated like Mr. De Dios.

[Standard Obstruction of Justice by DOJ Personnel] (9) It should also be noted that criminal Investigators Benjamin

Saurino and Ronald Gardello of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Man-hattan similarly ignored the evidence I brought forward to them on the Nine Kings and Dominican Federation. These two investigators were credited for convicting Mr. Occhipinti and they made it clear to me they didn’t want to hear the evidence I had on the Federation which could have exonerated Mr. Occhipinti. They were only inter-ested in corruption cases I had brought to their office. In fact, I re-call a conversation, wherein, Investigator Saurino asked me about my involvement with Manuel De Dios and if I knew anything about the Occhipinti case. He then stopped and referred to Occhipinti in a derogatory manner, by saying “He’s no ----- good.” Realizing his bias and lack of interest in investigating the Federation and Nine Kings, I changed the subject of conversation.

[Rampant Corruption in New York Police Department] (10) In April 1995, I resigned from the New York City Police

Department Internal Affairs Unit after it became evident that my ef-forts to expose police corruption were being hampered. The same reason why I believe Commissioner Walter Mack was fired. It be-came evident to me that my life was in eminent danger and I could


be easily set up on fabricated misconduct charges like Mr. Occhip-inti. In fact, they brought departmental charges against me in 1995 and I won the case. The trial judge also admonished the depart-ment on the record for perjury. Often, I found myself isolated and in constant danger working alone in the worst neighborhoods of the city without a backup.

Today, I possess substantial evidence to prove that the NYC Po-lice Department media campaign to demonstrate that they could independently police themselves and route out corruption was sim-ply a media ploy to avoid having an independent counsel to oversee their internal affairs unit. In reality, corruption is still rampant in the department and high-ranking police brass are intentionally terminating viable corruption investigations in order to avoid fu-ture scandals exposed by the Mollen Commission. I also possess a consensually monitored tape conversation, which implicates a high-ranking police official who received bribes from the Domini-can Federation.

[Drug Cartels and U.S. Politicians] (11) I am willing to testify before Congress as to the allegations

set forth in this affidavit. In addition, I am willing to turn over to Borough President Molinari and Congressman Traficant the docu-mentary evidence I possess on the Dominican Federation, the Nine Kings and the Occhipinti drug cartel conspiracy. There are other important pieces of information relating to drug cartel operations and political corruption that I have not made public in this affidavit in order to protect my sources as well as ongoing media investiga-tions that I am involved with. In addition, I am willing to submit to a polygraph examination to prove the veracity of my allegations.

William Acosta

Veteran Police Officer Who Knew the Ropes Acosta, with over 12 years in law enforcement, had come to the

United States from Colombia and became a police officer, working un-dercover with state and federal agencies in bringing about the arrest and conviction of numerous criminals. As a Colombian, he had a better un-derstanding of the drug smugglers and their method of operation, and better able to infiltrate their ranks.

During this time he received numerous commendations and med-als. His work gained him attention in articles appearing in the New York Times, the New Yorker, Newsday, George Magazine, and the Village Voice. ABC’s television program, “Nightline,” showed Acosta as “The


Good Cop” on a segment, with one of the guests saying he took the oath of an officer “too literally.” Unfortunately, except for pie-in-the-sky fantasizing, there was no place in the real world for anyone to ex-pose high-level corruption in government.

As a result of carrying out his duties, Acosta suffered retaliation, he was threatened, he was shot at, he was attacked, and financially ruined.

Another Witness Came Forward In the same Congressional record, Manuel De Dios, former editor

of El Diario/La Prensa and editor of a weekly newspaper known as Canbyo, gave an affidavit that was published several years later in the Congressional Record (September 27, 1996). The affidavit stated:

During the course of my work for Canbyo I understood to write an expose concerning criminal complaints brought against an Im-migration and Naturalization Service Supervisory Special Agent named Joseph Occhipinti by various members of the Federation of Dominican Merchants and Industrialists of New York. During the course of my investigatory work in researching the article, I inter-viewed numerous individuals who are members of the Federation of Dominican Merchants and Industrialists of New York.

These individuals confided to me that Mr. Occhipinti had been set up by the Federation and that the complaints against him were fraudulent. These individuals have indicated to me that they are in fear of their safety and as a result would not go public with this in-formation. I would be more than willing to share my information with any law enforcement agencies or Courts concerned with these matters and would cooperate fully in any further investigations. Expose DOJ-Protected Corruption and Be Murdered In an all-too-common scenario befalling people who expose DOJ

corruption, De Dios paid the price. He was gunned down and killed on March 11, 1992. His death would not have happened but for the DOJ conspiracy of cover-ups and obstruction of justice.

John F. Kennedy, Jr.: Profile in Cowardice An article in The New American, titled, “Profile In Cowardice,”

described a prominent New York socialite who contacted Congressman James Traficant (December 2, 1993) and provided information on one of the DOJ’s steps taken to frame Occhipinti. The witness was identi-fied in the article as “A.R.,” and identified as a friend of John F. Ken-nedy, Jr.

That witness stated that during a June 11, 1991, conversation with Kennedy, and the night before Kennedy was to testify against Occhip-inti. The article stated in part:

He testified that Kennedy bemoaned the fact that the next day


he would have to testify against an innocent man. According to J.R., Kennedy stated that he was being “forced” to testify for politi-cal reasons and that he was being “used” to prejudice the jury.

The object was to use Kennedy’s testimony to influence the jury, even though Kennedy had never heard of the Occhipinti case. Occhipinti’s defense team had the witness undergo a polygraph ex-amination for determining his truthfulness, which he passed. Several years later, Kennedy died in a private plane crash when he

was flying from New Jersey to Nantucket. The crash was due to Ken-nedy’s lack of piloting experience in night marginal VFR conditions.

Dominican Republic Diplomat Supported Occhipinti A New American article (February 21, 1994) described a witness,

identified as “R.A.G,” who held several diplomatic positions for the Dominican Republic, including that of consul general and ambassador to Jamaica. The witness gave two highly sensitive affidavits (August 19, 1993) that provided more details about the conspiracy against Oc-chipinti. One affidavit stated in part:

On or about the end of 1989, I was personally told by Dominican businessmen Jose Delio Marte, Silvio Sanchez, Pedro Allegria, and Ernesto Farbege that they needed my political assistance in elimi-nating former Immigration officer Joseph Occhipinti. They ex-plained to me that Occhipinti was a threat to their illegal busi-nesses, which included loan sharking, gambling, drug distribution, and the employment of illegal aliens. In his second affidavit, he stated in part: I have confirmed why government witness Jose Liberato, a complainant against Mr. Occhipinti at trial, had falsely testified against Mr. Occhipinti and participated in the conspiracy. Mr. Liberato, a bodega owner, is a major participant of Sea Crest Trading Company and its illegal activities.

In his affidavit he also named the person who delivered drug-

related money from the Federation and Sea Crest to the Dinkins politi-cal campaign.

DOJ Witnesses Arrested Again Most of the witnesses used by DOJ prosecutors against Occhipinti

had criminal records. After the trial, they continued to engage in crimi-nal activities and continued to be arrested. An example: New York Daily News headline (June 17, 1993) read:

Vice Cops Bag 3 in Bribes. Two of the people named were broth-


ers, Jose and Joaquin Checo, who had filed charges against Occhip-inti and had been arrested by the New York Police Department for gambling and bribery offenses at their bodega. In the same article, New York Police Department spokesman, Raymond O’Donnell, re-ferred to the two brothers as members of a Dominican organized crime organization known as The Federation. “We’re going to do to you like we did Occhipinti!” The immigrants learn fast. As the brothers were being handcuffed,

one of the police officers, Sgt. Frank Perez, heard an employee holler, “You can’t get away with this. We’re going to do to you like we did to Occhipinti!”

Occhipinti described to me during a telephone conversation (Octo-ber 11, 1997) the findings of his multi-agency task force while investi-gating criminal activities in New York while working with AUSA Louis Freeh:

Let me explain to you why things happened, in connection with my case, and why I think they prematurely suspended Jim Fox, the FBI Director. There is a company called Sea Crest Trading Com-pany in Greenwich, Connecticut. Now we know, and its been estab-lished that they’ve been the target of as many as ten federal and lo-cal investigations. And in each and every case, the investigations were ordered terminated by the Justice Department.

[CIA, Capitol National Bank, And Dominican Organized Crime] The company was being run by certain Cubans who were in-

volved in the Bay of Pigs. And they had, as part of their money laundering operations, they were dealing with Capitol National Bank in New York, being run by Carlos Cordoba, another CIA op-erative. I understand that, in Dominican organized crime, it’s probably one of the most vicious ethnic crime groups in the United States.

[Sea Crest, Dominican Federation, and Organized Crime] And what they do is, they basically intermingle and usually

work hand in hand with the Cuban organized crime network, par-ticularly in the gambling operations. So what happens, without re-alizing it, I stumbled into this Operation Bodega, never realizing that the Dominican bodegas that I was hurting was part of this Dominican Federation which is actually the front of an established Dominican cartel and that the fact that they were using in their money laundering operation, the Sea Crest Trading Company.

[Foremost Expert on Dominican Organized Crime] I was the Chief of Immigration and Naturalization Service. I


was working mostly drug cases, and I was probably the most expert on Dominican organized crime. Nevertheless, all in all, I thought that I was being set up simply because I was hurting Dominican organized crime and that I knew the federation was a very politi-cally powerful organization. And I just believed the time that they went to Mayor David Dinkins, convinced him that I was a racist and that I was hurting their operations, and Dinkins, who attrib-uted his win in the 1988 election due to the Dominican Federation which is a front, called for a federal civil rights investigation.

[Lawyer For Organized Crime Network Former AUSA] Now what happened, I uncovered evidence into this cartel that

I was investigating, that their chief legal counsel was a former As-sistant United States attorney in the southern district of New York, and that according to my source who is a credible informant and who was willing to wear a wire, she alleged that this former Assis-tant U.S. Attorney was the legal counsel for the Dominican Federa-tion.

And he said to me, this guy’s name was David Lawrence, who was chief of the criminal division. David Lawrence said to me, ‘I want to interview this woman.” So I brought her in. Not only was she credible, she actually had documents in her possession that could put this guy, this former Assistant U.S. Attorney and his part-ner, away in jail for a variety of drug trafficking, money laundering violations.

[Prosecutor Leaking Evidence to Organized Crime] What happened is, a week after I brought her in, her informa-

tion was leaked to this former assistant for whom she worked in that law firm saying, “I know what you did; my people told me, and the U.S. Attorney is trying to set me up, and he said he put a con-tract on Camarena.” It’s clear I went to the U.S. Attorney with vi-able evidence and he refused to work on it.

What they actually told me was, “Leave the investigation alone; leave it alone.” Now at the time I simply said, well, you know what it is; the U.S. Attorney is very much concerned about their prestige. What happened was, in the southern district a year earlier, FBI had arrested an assistant U.S. Attorney for drug pos-session, and his name was Pearlmuttan.

[DOJ Blocking Exposure of Crime Activities in New York] What I thought at the time was, well, they’re blowing New York

simply because they had a scandal two years earlier and they’re trying to avoid a potential scandal, and they’re only concerned about their image. But when David Lawrence told me to leave this


investigation alone, I was angry. A New York City police officer was murdered and I’m on the trail of a major Dominican cartel. That’s when I started my Operation Bodega, knowing that I wasn’t going to get any support from the Justice Department.

[NYC Prosecutor Circumventing DOJ Cover-Up] So I went over to Morgenthau’s office and he was convinced

that Operation Bodega not only would net the cartel but also ex-pose the money laundering operations as well as the alleged cor-ruption. He assigned three assistant district attorneys to my case and within a ten-month period we began to develop substantial evi-dence not only on the Dominican federation but Sea Crest Trading Company.

[Receiving Bribery Offers] And I knew I was getting close to the operation because two,

actually three bribery offers were made to me and immediately I went back to the FBI, the supervisor in the corruption unit. And I told him everything I uncovered on Sea Crest and on this former federal prosecutor. And he was convinced; he wanted to do an un-dercover investigation. He was so convinced that he actually as-signed a case agent. And the goal was for me to accept bribes, set them up and take them down and squeeze them and find out who’s corrupt.

What happened is, when we get to my meeting in the southern district of New York, which is the criminal division, I get told by them that the southern district would not go with the undercover operation. He said to me specifically, he said, “Something smells.”

So I realized that several months before that they told me they didn’t want to do Operation Esquire.

[Drug Cartels Demand Shutdown of Investigating Unit] I had worked previously in the corruption unit and I had some

confidence in them, so when the Dominican Federation held their press conference on the steps of City Hall demanding that my op-eration be closed down and that I be investigated for federal civil rights investigation, at the time I didn’t have knowledge of all the facts.

I just simply thought I was hurting a drug cartel; they needed to try to make it into a racial issue with politicians, with the Repub-lican thing, and that’s what happened. So at that the pieces to the puzzle weren’t being put together. What happened was, they simply thought that I would be prosecuted and convicted and be taken away. And no one would even listen to me. But what would ulti-mately happen was that I was a credible person, and every time the media investigated my case, they found out that I was innocent and


that I had been set up by drug lords. [Drug Lords Controlling U.S. Attorney’s Office] And that the drug lords influenced the U.S. Attorney’s office to

selectively prosecute me. Now we know that because several PD undercover operations were done where they went actually into the same bodegas who testified I conducted unlawful searches and cap-tured them on national TV involved in criminal activity. What hap-pened was, I was in prison, and the pressure was so much on the White House that they had to do something. My case was getting a lot of notoriety.

I asked, “What charges did they make?”

They charged me for federal civil rights violations. The first of-ficer in American history to be charged under the federal civil rights with illegal consent search. The claim was, yes his signature was on the consent, but they claimed they didn’t sign the consent form until after the search. The first officer to be prosecuted; it’s an administrative violation under the exclusionary rule. If a judge thought a search was illegal, they’d just throw the case out of court. I was the first one to ever be prosecuted.

The bottom line was, President George Bush, under intense pressure and because of his relationship with Staten Island presi-dent Molinari told him there was so much evidence for my inno-cence, he gave me clemency—he didn’t give me a full pardon but he gave me clemency and got me out of jail.

What happened was, in January I get my retirement because I had 22 years in the government, and I’m a credible witness. Very credible, and what everyone basically puts it up to is, this is an il-lustration of how powerful the struggles are in our United States, and secondly how they’re able to manipulate the civil rights to their advantage.

At that point I became not only hero to American law enforce-ment but even some of the civil rights groups have been convinced that my case was a clear case of how the drug cartel was using civil rights laws to their advantage. Right now I have a lot of friends, a lot of credibility. What I thought I could put together was the following.

[Occhipinti Supported by FBI SAC Jim Fox] I started to realize when witnesses came forward that Jim Fox

was one of my biggest supporters. While I was in jail, Jim Fox pub-licly stated that there was evidence of my innocence despite the fact that the FBI was refusing to release the evidence. What we believe


happened was the following: We believe, while I was in jail, the Justice Department con-

ducted an investigation. And they cut Jim Fox out of the loop for one reason or another. We believe Jim Fox realized that I was being framed and he asked one of the agents who conducted the investi-gation what happened. We believe when he saw what happened he publicly announced he was to retire in a couple of months.

[Motion for New Trial] Now when these public statements were made, we made an ap-

plication for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence from the drug cartel. We specifically made mention that Jim Fox made public statements, and I know that the U.S. Attorney was very upset with him. Cause they called him down and they asked him to give a deposition saying that his public statements were taken out of con-text. He refused to do it, and he was fired; he was terminated about three months before his retirement. “What’s the status of that discharge; has he taken any legal action?”

Basically he left and became one of the heads of security for a major bank; he passed away about 3-4 months ago. Let me tell you what we uncovered. A major investigator for a clearing house that deals in food coupons; you know those coupons when you go shop-ping. He brought to my attention that terrorist groups were using coupons as a way to front international terrorism. He explained that it was a 200 million-dollar-a-year operation. And they were using bodega supermarkets. Sea Crest Trade Company was to do the money laundering.

[Bodegas as Clearing House for Criminal Activities] Most of your Middle East terrorist groups were using several

ways to raise money for terrorism. One was food stamp fraud, the second was food coupons, and the third was pirating of films that was sold out of supermarket bodegas that was controlled by the Federation. And they were using the bodegas as a clearinghouse for Sea Crest Trading Company, which explains why I was getting them a little nervous. But he said to me, “Joe, you’re missing the picture here. The Dominicans are involved with the Cubans, but don’t you realize what really happened here?” And this is what he explained.

[Bodega Money to Terrorist Groups] When Ben Jacobson began his investigation into the food

stamp fraud and coupon fraud, he was the chief investigator for E. C. Nielson Company that administers food stamps in the coupon program. In his investigation he said that what really was happen-


ing was that much of the coupon redemption would be concentrated at a little grocery store. And when he became suspicious that the monies were going to terrorist groups, he reported his findings to the FBI.

But what happened was, the President had given me clemency, and I knew that I had been set up. The evidence clearly showed it. We believed I had been set up solely by the Dominican drug lords and that I was easily prosecuted because I wasn’t perceived as a team player because I was attempting to expose corruption. So what happened was, Ben Jacobson opened my eyes and he ex-plained to me what happened. And he’s a credible guy. Not only is Ben Jacobson a retired New York City detective; he’s also a college professor that teaches at Rutgers University. He is also the chief investigator for E. C. Nielson Company. And this is what he pro-ceeded to explain.

[IRS Retaliation] Ever since he started his investigation at Sea Crest, he became

the focus for retaliation by the IRS and others; he was basically told to leave the investigation alone. He couldn’t understand why. What he was able to connect was that Sea Crest, based on docu-ments he obtained; they’re called UCC’s; Universal Commercial Code. Let me explain; if I lend you a thousand dollars I fill out a promissory note that you registered with the county clerk on a form that’s called the CC.

[Middle East Terrorists Protected by CIA-FBI?] With this investigation he started to notice that many of the

people who were tied into Sea Crest were from the Middle East, managing stores that he suspected, supermarkets, mini-markets, that he suspected had ties to terrorism. And he reported his findings to the FBI. He provided them evidence of the funding for terrorism. What happened was, the FBI, just like the other investigations by the IRS, were ordered by the Justice Department to terminate it. And this is why he believed that happened.

[Funding Middle East terrorists and Mujahedin] They needed a way, a mechanism to launder the money. So it

was decided that they would bring in the Mujahedin principals into the United States, set them up in mini-markets and supermarkets and utilize Sea Crest Trading Company as a way to funnel money to the Dominican Republic, and then back. And the money was earmarked for arms.


[World Trade Center Bombing Related to CIA-FBI Involvement and Cover-Ups?]

What happened, he thinks, is while the government may have had a legitimate reason for using Sea Crest Trading Company, which was being run by former CIA operatives, Cuban Nationals, they never realized that the terrorist groups were using the money. And when Ben Jacobson provides them with that intelligence and they closed it down because they were told to, we believe, the bombing of the World Trade Center resulted.

[WTC Bombers Funded by DOJ-Protected Groups?] Now if you look at the convicted people on the World Trade

Center Bombing, one fellow is Salan Abdel-Rahman. He owned a mini-market in Jersey City. If you pull the UCC [report], it comes back “Sea Crest Trading Company.” So what happened was, the Justice Department and the CIA were afraid that if this information was ever exposed, it would show that the FBI was alerted that these monies through the food and coupon fraud actually funded the bombing of the World Trade Center, and that the FBI failed to take any action.

There would be a major scandal. Now we believe this is one of the reasons why Jim Fox knew what was happening. He was the one who spearheaded the entire FBI investigation into the bombing of the World Trade Center. So listen to this very carefully. [DOJ Shuts Down Congressional Investigation]

Congressman Traficant begins a series of inquiries into Sea Crest under the Freedom of Information Act, and almost immedi-ately they close it down. They refuse to give any information, quot-ing national security. So what I think we have here, the real scandal is, the CIA realized the federal agency was being set up in order to protect their operation, they allowed me to go to jail. [CIA Funding World Wide Terrorists?]

But the real story was that the CIA used Sea Crest Trading in order to facilitate money for Mujahedin [terrorists] during which time it inadvertently got into the hands of suspected terrorists. They were alerted of that fact; they failed to take any action; the bomb-ing occurred, and they’ve got to do damage control. They were afraid if the American public learned about this it would be a ma-jor scandal. Drug Cartels Funded Clinton’s Election Campaign]

To further compound this now, what’s been happening with the White House? We’ve now learned that the Dominican Federation is a front for cartels and Sea Crest Trading Company was behind many, many fundraisers for the Clinton-Gore campaign. Now this


is published in the New American magazine. What I’m saying here is published also in the Congressional Record. I think this guy Richard Taus, and what he says was accurate and what was hap-pening in the New York FBI office. [New York Post Protecting Terrorist Activities]

Now the guy who broke the story, the guy who came up with the evidence, is a reporter for the New York Post by the name of Al Guart. But the paper refused to print it; apparently the CIA must have a lot of influence in the media. The Post refused to allow him to break the story. There’s another guy, Karl Ross.

He does investigative reports for some of the largest magazines and newspapers, and also the Washington Post. And they’re refus-ing to allow him to break his story on Sea Crest. The point I’m try-ing to make here is, this is what was happening. This is what we could prove. That viable local and federal investigations into the Sea Crest Trading Company have been suspiciously terminated by the Justice Department. Why?

[CIA Sea Crest Operation Funding Afghan Terrorists] I just wanted to let you know that the Sea Crest Trading Com-

pany appears to have been a CIA operation; it was being run by the Cuban mob that was involved in the Bay of Pigs. We know their connection with the Colombian and Dominican cartels. But as I said, apparently that was used as a front to money launder the money for the Mujahedeen when, during that process, monies were actually diverted to actual terrorist groups and the FBI knew about it, was told not to do anything and then, when the bombing oc-curred, there was a big scandal there. Occhipinti’s Fate How did Occhipinti fare after his many years of dedicated govern-

ment service? After 22 years of federal service, after receiving many awards, he was forced to retire on a disability pension. He suffered from post-stress trauma, hypertension, heart disease, and gastrointesti-nal disorders, surely brought on or worsened by his years of fighting crime and government cover-ups. Occhipinti wrote:

I will always cherish my many law enforcement accomplish-ments and my efforts to protect our borders from drugs. Unfortu-nately, I realize now that my dedication to duty was in vain. I was very naive. I believed in the criminal justice system and the alleged war against drugs. I realize now that we have lost the war against drugs.

Moreover, how politically powerful foreign drug lords are in


the United States. I was getting too close to the major players in the drug world and had to be eliminated. Fortunately, I wasn’t mur-dered like journalist Manuel De Dios. Instead, the drug lords sent a more powerful threat to law enforcement; they can now manipulate and misuse to their advantage, important civil rights laws that can imprison and intimidate dedicated law enforcement officers.

At present, due to my landmark civil rights prosecution, which never involved police brutality, racial bias or corruption, drug in-terdiction in many jurisdictions has been terminated. The police as-signed to drug interdiction often rely upon consent searches and will not subject themselves to possible imprisonment and loss of a career due to an allegation of an unlawful search and seizure. My only regret is that I took away precious time from my family and subjected my loved ones to tremendous hardships simply because I wanted to do my sworn duty. Nostalgia Writing of Occhipinti‘s Tragic Downfall It was sad to write about how powerful and corrupt people have in-

flicted upon Occhipinti and his family, and upon many other dedicated government personnel who suffered retaliation for carrying out their duties. It reminded me of what I went through, first as an FAA air safety inspector and then later what I experienced as I sought to expose other areas of government corruption. It is very probable that Occhip-inti and I, and others like us, were fools, trying to protect a public who didn’t care enough to get informed or show any responsibility.

During a discussion with Occhipinti in March 1999, he said that almost every reporter who exposed the DOJ corruption has had the IRS after him.

Radio and Television Appearances Upon being released from prison, Occhipinti appeared as guest on

several hundred radio and television shows, exposing the crime and drug cartels, and their political influence, and how the FBI and CIA protected terrorists. His grueling schedule caused him to collapse on board an airliner (November 21, 1993), followed by four days of hospi-talization.

Since 1978, I appeared as guest on over 3000 radio and television shows and it can be especially tiring, especially when on a tour and do-ing seven or more shows a day.

Protection of Ethnic Crime Groups In one of his writings, Occhipinti explained to me some of the

problems associated with government agents’ attempts to fight power-ful ethnic crime groups:

I have seen dozens of viable federal and local investigations


into Dominican organized crime groups prematurely terminated by federal authorities. Why? In July 1997, the FBI published a confi-dential intelligence report on Dominican organized crime opera-tions in the United States, which confirm what I have known for the past twenty years. There has been much speculation that many of these investigations were prematurely terminated due to possible national security reasons, or maybe, the principals were govern-ment informants that had to be protected.

It is important to note that the biggest crime threat facing the American public is the growth of international drug syndicates in the United States. Foreign drug lords and organized crime have adapted very well in setting up criminal operations in the United States for a variety of reasons. Foreign drug lords and ethnic or-ganized crime groups have learned the essence of American poli-tics and know how to manipulate the political and criminal justice systems. [Principal Distributor of Colombian Drugs]

For instance, U.S. law enforcement sources have developed convincing evidence that the Dominican drug cartel is the principal distributor of narcotics in the United States on behalf of the Co-lombian drug cartel. In addition, they are credited for laundering billions of dollars in drug proceeds, both here and abroad. Yet, we rarely see media reports that publicize Dominican organized crime. Why? [Dominican Drug Cartels Politically Powerful]

Many ask me why the Dominican cartel has become so politi-cally powerful in the United States. I explain that they will often operate as a legitimate political action group, often making unlaw-ful political contributions to elected officials and having become successful in conducting widespread election fraud. Clearly, the ability to deliver campaign contributions and needed votes to win an election can understandably influence most political candidates. [Organized Ethnic Crime Groups]

Hopefully, you can better understand why foreign drug cartels have become politically powerful in the United States. It also ex-plains that when ethnic organized crime groups become the targets of law enforcement scrutiny, they seek immediate political interven-tion in hopes of terminating a criminal investigation or inquiry. In many cases, elected officials are successful in influencing authori-ties to terminate a criminal investigation by often alleging officer misconduct, or that the investigation was racially motivated.


[Most Crimes Committed by Ethnic Crime Groups] In the United States, statistics will show that the majority of

organized crime activity in the United States is being committed by organized ethnic crime groups. Yet, the Justice Department’s “Or-ganized Crime Strike Forces” continues to target and prosecute traditional Italian organized crime groups, which represent less than one percent of organized crime activity in the United States. Why? Is it because it has become “politically” incorrect to target these other ethnic crime groups? Or, are these foreign drug lords being protected by elected officials or the intelligence community? Ethnic Groups Taking Over Criminal Activities Partly because of naïveté, partly because of American’s gullibility,

partly because of Americans who are willing to sabotage America’s interest for money from special groups, ethnic groups are taking over all types of criminal activities that make all of America suffer. Even the Japanese version of the U.S. Mafia: “yakuza.” has taken advantage of America’s love affair with drugs.

Many Colombian and Mexican drug traffickers, and the yakuza, set up businesses along the Mexican-U.S. border after NAFTA came into being. Little is known in the United States about yakuza activities, or even its existence. Years ago, CIA agent Gunther Russbacher described his dealings in the Midwest with the yakuza, most of which I left out of my books for another day. It was reported to me that a company with packinghouses in Mexico along the U.S. border, Fruitiko, is associated with the Japanese yakuza.

CIA-DOJ Funding, Training, Arming, and Protecting Terrorists, and the WTC 1993 Bombing and the 9/11 Attacks Evidence not publicized by the Justice Department, Congress, or

the mainstream media shows a relationship between the World Trade Center bombing and the criminal activities government agents sought to report, which DOJ employees blocked. And these activities would again affect the World Trade Center on the fateful day of September 11, 2001.

Money to fund the terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center came from the very same criminal activities that Occhipinti and other government agents sought to halt: and DOJ employees protected!

Money acquired by Sea Crest, a CIA operation, funded terrorists. FBI and CIA people were identified by the 9/11 Commission as failure to act on known terrorist activities. But what the commission withheld from the report was that these people actively assisted and protected terrorists, for years.


Financing World Trade Center Bombing With Bodega Food Coupon Fraud and Drug Money A New Jersey news service, Golden State News Service, distributed

to newspapers on October 1995 the following in-depth interview with several key New York area law enforcement officers relating to the bombing of the World Trade Center:

The terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center was financed with drug and other racket money laundered and leveraged through small ethnic grocery stores. What’s more, terrorists even now are siphoning off more such funds. The real leader in the World Trade Center bombing has been allowed to flee capture, and all this is happening under the apparent protection of the Center Intelligence Agency.

According to Jacobson, it was the monies generated from the Sea Crest food coupon redemption fraud scheme that financed the bombing of the World Trade Center. According to Jacobson, Sea Crest is suspected of being the source of a two hundred-million-dollar a year food coupon redemption scheme ... Jacobson alleges that Sea Crest has been protected by the Justice Department be-cause of an alleged CIA operation that utilized that firm....

Occhipinti says he and Jacobson, acting independently of each other, have tried repeatedly to interest various federal state and even local law enforcement authorities to follow through on inves-tigations of Sea Crest. “But always the investigations go nowhere.” Lenny Lemmer, a detective sergeant with the New York City Police Department, said recently in a sworn statement that he has encoun-tered similar dead-ends in probing Sea Crest and its alleged drug cartel connections...

Lemmer said he was called to meet several times with FBI agents and federal prosecutors, who tried to intimidate him into abandoning any leads he might uncover about Sea Crest or any-thing exculpatory about Occhipinti. Lemmer said he was aware of “concrete evidence” about alleged Sea Crest money laundering ac-tivities in Bogotá, Colombia, and conveyed this information to an FBI agent.

In a recent interview, Jacobson confirmed that proceeds from coupon fraud paid for the World Trade Center bombing, and that Sea Crest had received redemption checks signed over by Middle Eastern and Dominican grocers suspected of participating in such fraud. The conspiracy is so loose that money may be siphoned off to terrorists without all parties involved in the original loan-shark-coupon scams being aware of it, according to investigators.


History of Funding Terrorists and Paying Afterwards The United States funneled over three billion dollars to the Muja-

hedeen in the 1980s, and provided training in the use of weapons and terrorist activities. This was done despite the known hatred of the Mujahedeen for the United States due to its one-sided support for Israel. The knowledge that these acquired terrorist tactics and weapons would eventually be used against the United States was ignored, with dire consequences for many terrorist victims in the United States.

CIA Fronts Funneled Money to Terrorists Since 1990, several of my CIA sources explained how Sea Crest—

a CIA front—laundered money to obtain military equipment and pro-vide training for the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan during the 1980s. Oc-chipinti‘s task force, with no connection to my CIA sources, discovered that the funding of terrorists existed in the 1990s, and that some of the money was going to terrorists in the United States. And former FBI agent Richard Taus also discovered this relationship during his official duties with the FBI. Today, he languishes in prison for exposing these matters.

A key figure in one of the terrorist groups funded by the CIA Sea Crest operation and the FBI protection of the drug smugglers was Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was convicted by a New York jury for his role in planning the bombing of the World Trade Center building. He was sentenced to life in prison, and nine co-conspirators were sen-tenced to long prison terms.

CIA Granting Visa to Known Terrorist Despite his known terrorist activities, including his involvement in

the plot to assassinate Egypt’s Anwar Sadat, a CIA agent in the U.S. Consulate office in Khartoum, Sudan, issued a one-year visa for Sheik Omar to enter the United States in May 1990. He arrived in New York in July, and a few months later the State Department revoked the visa, advising the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of this fact. However, high-level pressure caused the INS to issue a green card to Sheik Omar several months later.

The people who funded Sheik Omar’s entry into the United States included Mustafa Shalabi (Director of Alkifah, a support fund for Mu-jahedeen fighters based in Brooklyn); Muslim Brotherhood member and CIA asset from Afghanistan, Mahmud Abouhalima, and El Sayid Nosair, an Egyptian. They had received training, funding, and arms from the CIA.

U.S. Army Training Afghan Terrorists Besides receiving CIA training, Nosair and Abouhalima had been

earlier trained by the terrorist, Abu Nidal. The U.S. Army in 1989 sent Sergeant Ali A. Mohammed to Jersey City to give training to recruits


for the Mujahedeen. Among those receiving this training were Abou-halima and Nosair. Nosair, Abouhalima, and Omar were later convicted of waging terrorist warfare in the United States.

FBI Cover-up of Terrorist Activities Nosair was suspected of the 1990 murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane, a

Jewish militant in New York City. Following this murder, the FBI ob-tained a search warrant and seized terrorist material from his Jersey City apartment. Included in this material were bomb-making materials, a list of people marked for death, including Rabbi Kahane, bomb-making instructions, and pictures of targeted buildings, including the World Trade Center! The FBI made no arrests, and withheld this infor-mation from New York City prosecutors seeking to arrest those respon-sible for Kahane’s murder. This withholding of evidence played a key role in his December 20, 1991, acquittal.

DOJ Cover-up Helped Plan Airliner Bombings Funding Nosair’s defense were funds from criminal activities asso-

ciated with Sea Crest Trading Company, the same CIA-related opera-tion that funded the bomb components and their assembly. Many of these activities were under the supervision of Ramzi Yousef, an Afghan terrorist who came to the United States into Sheik Omar’s group in 1992.

While working with explosives in his Manila apartment in 1994, a fire occurred, causing Yousef to flee before police arrived. After the police searched the apartment and examined his computer files they found plans to place bombs on eleven U.S. airliners departing Far East locations.

Advance Warning of Plans to Fly Airliners Into Buildings Although Yousef fled, police arrested his roommate, Abdul Hakim

Murad, a pilot who had received his pilot training in the United States. He provided further information on the plan to place bombs on U.S. airliners. If that plan had succeeded it could have killed several thou-sand air travelers. Hakim also revealed that al Qaeda cells planned to crash U.S. airliners into buildings in the nation’s capital at Washington.

Yousef was convicted in late 1996 of involvement in the conspiracy to place bombs on U.S. aircraft in the Far East. New York judge Wil-liam Schlesinger granted the terrorist’s lawyer William Kunstler ex-traordinary latitude while hamstringing the prosecution.

WTC Bombing Made Possible by DOJ Cover-ups Without funding from Sea Crest Trading Company, and without

Justice Department personnel blocking prosecution of Dominicans drug traffickers and Sea Crest, it is very probable there would not have been the money to fund the terrorists. The 1993 bomb blast killed six people,


injured over a thousand others, and did over $500 million in damage in the February 26, 1993, World Trade Center bombing. Eight years later, the death toll was 3,000.

The imprisonment of Sheik Omar, following the World Trade Cen-ter bombing, did not destroy the group’s ability to conduct further ter-rorist acts in the United States. This became apparent on September 11, 2001.

“Dominican Drug Money Helping Elect President” Reports indicated that U.S. and Dominican Republic politicians

were receiving substantial money from Capital National Bank, Sea Crest Trading Company, and the Dominican Federation. An in-depth The New American article (April 28, 1997), titled “Dominican drug money may have helped elect our President,” stated in part:

A report from Puerto Rico suggests that the Clinton White House has accepted drug-tainted contributions linked to the Do-minican Republic’s radical Dominican Revolutionary Party (PRD). PRD members ... made campaign donations last September during a Democratic National Committee fund-raiser at Coogan’s Irish Pub in Washington Heights [in New York City]. PRD members Simon Diaz and Pablo Espinal supported the campaign of U.S. President Clinton....

Both Diaz and Espinal reportedly posed for pictures with Vice President Al Gore, according to PRD leaders. Diaz is vice president of a New York City chapter of the PRD and president of a group of party-affiliated businesses. He is also currently under investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and various other anti-narcotics agencies with regard to the PRD’s “alleged nexus with international drug cartels” as El Vocero reported....

Furthermore, although U.S. federal officials were aware of the links between PRD and the drug cartels, “for reasons that remain unclear, these officials exerted pressure to derail active investiga-tions in the matter.”

Despite his known drug and crime connections, Jose Francisco

Pena-Gomez, the PRD’s leader and Dominican Republic presidential candidate was President Bill Clinton’s choice in the Dominican elec-tions held in 1994 and 1996. This recommendation followed the cam-paign contributions received by Clinton and Gore.

Luck of President Bill Clinton and Al Gore On May 10, 1998, another potential witness and threat against

President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore died. Former Do-minican Republic presidential candidate Jose Pena-Gomez was a poten-tial threat to them because of the drug money Gomez and his drug-


related groups gave to the Clinton-Gore campaign and because of the Clinton administration’s protection of Dominican drug trafficking and other crimes. Pena-Gomez died from pulmonary edema.

Parallel Discoveries in Pennsylvania Four agents from the Pennsylvania Bureau of Narcotics Investiga-

tion office (BNI) were experiencing similar problems with Dominican drug traffickers, high-level cover-ups, and retaliation. Agents John R. McLaughlin, Charles A. Micewski, Dennis J. McKeefery, and Edward Eggles, working as a team, discovered evidence of widespread criminal activities by the Dominican Revolutionary Party and Dominican crime figures. They also suffered retaliation that insured the continuation of the drug smuggling and funding of terrorist activities.

The BNI narcotic agents discovered that drug money was gathered and distributed at fund raisers held in Pennsylvania and that various government agencies were actively aware of these facts. They also dis-covered drug money funneled to U.S. politicians.

Ties to Colombian Drug Traffickers McLaughlin described what he found about Colombian connec-

tions to Dominican drug traffickers: While at an intelligence meeting, I received a document from Inter-pol that described an organization of Dominican drug traffickers with ties to the Cali cartel in Colombia dating back to at least 1991, and also documents hundreds of kilos of cocaine seized as well as approximately 100 people either arrested or having out-standing arrest warrants. This organization has ties to the Domini-can Revolutionary Party headed by Jose Francisco Pena-Gomez who was being backed by the U.S. Department of State in the last election. Pennsylvania Attorney General Protecting Drug Traffickers On May 10, 1996, McLaughlin notified the Deputy Attorney Gen-

eral of a major heroin shipment due to arrive from New York and a large amount of drug-money being laundered. Harrisburg Attorney General’s office refused to allow a bust to occur. The surveillance team was called off and the heroin sale occurred that evening at 7:45 p.m., with Dominicans taking over $100,000 to New York. Shortly thereafter, over 116 overdoses from heroin were reported from using the heroin brand, “Dead Presidents.” Numerous drug overdoses and deaths were reported from using another form of Dominican heroin called “Super Buck.” BNI agents were ordered not to interfere with these sales that were occurring at various Philadelphia street corners.


Dropping Charges Against 85 Drug Traffickers McLaughlin was told that from April 16 to November 19, 1996, the

Philadelphia district attorney’s office dismissed 85 defendants who were caught with $879,000 worth of heroin, $47,000 worth of crack, $148,000 worth of cocaine, and large sums of money, vehicles and weapons.

In addition to protecting the major drug trafficking, this sent a mes-sage to other government agents that they should not investigate any of the Dominican drug traffickers, drug-money launderers, or drug-money-related political contributions.

Retaliatory Removal that Protected Drug Crimes Shortly thereafter, on April 16, 1996, Arnold Gordon, First Deputy

District attorney for Philadelphia, met with the Attorney General and charged that there was a problem with the BNI agents in the Philadel-phia office. This was followed by a series of adverse actions against the four agents that halted their drug investigations into the politically con-nected drug traffickers.

Part of their removal was related to information provided by Dar-lene Novinger, as I described in Defrauding America and Drugging America. These books provide considerably more information about the matters in these pages, which further prove the corrupt culture in the various offices of the Justice Department and the CIA, which made them unable and unwilling to prevent the events of 9/11.

The Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office took McLaughlin off drug cases on the sham excuse that McLaughlin made a grammatical error on an affidavit. McLaughlin stated “the” informant instead of “an” informant, an error that was meaningless in light of the details in the report, and could be made by anyone without any unfavorable re-sults. It was clear; the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office was pro-tecting drug traffickers from arrest.

Another Example of Legal Fraternity Misconduct On January 13, 1997, a confidential informant (CI 902-96) told

BNI agents that a prominent defense lawyer, Guy Sciolla, was telling his Dominican clients to falsely report that BNI narcotic agents skimmed money from them when they were arrested. This was the same as one of the two charges Dominican drug traffickers made against Occhipinti. They must have learned from that earlier matter to use the same tactic against other government agents. McLaughlin re-ported this to the district attorney’s office and again, the Pennsylvania prosecutor refused to act against the lawyer.

Fearing for the Life of an Informant During a March 27, 1996, BNI meeting at Philadelphia headquar-

ters attended by CIA agent David Lawrence, McLaughlin and Regional


Director John Sunderhauf, Lawrence wanted the name of one of BNI’s key inside informants who was disclosing highly sensitive information about Dominican drug trafficking. Recognizing that the state Attorney General’s office was blocking the investigation and prosecution of known drug traffickers, McLaughlin, fearing for the life of the infor-mant, refused to reveal the informant’s identity.

FBI Pressuring Informant to File False Affidavit McLaughlin reported (July 8, 1997) that a Confidential Informant

(Nr. 910-95) called BNI agents about FBI agents from the Federal Cor-ruption Probe Task Force pressuring him to sign an affidavit containing derogatory statements about BNI agents that weren’t true.

Retaliatory Reassignment In May 1996, State Attorney General Tom Corbett announced that

McLaughlin and the three other BNI agents working on Dominican-related cases were removed from their drug assignments and reas-signed, unable to get their regular jobs back. Despite the agents’ request for information as to what they had done wrong, no reason was given. They were reassigned and given menial and often degrading tasks.

I know the tactic. While I was with the FAA, reporting very serious air safety and criminal violations related to a series of fatal airline crashes, I was transferred to an undesirable assignment. My predeces-sor on that same assignment, who reported similar air safety miscon-duct, was transferred to Puerto Rico, an undesirable location.

On June 3, 1996, the BNI agents were told that they could no longer get information from the New York DEA office, thereby depriv-ing the BNI of important drug-related information. On July 18, 1996, the Pennsylvania district attorney’s office advised the narcotic agents that the office would accept no more cases from them. On August 21, 1997, U.S. Customs agent John Malandros told McLaughlin that he was ordered to drop the investigation into the Revolutionary Dominican Party.

Media Aiding and Abetting Drug Traffickers and Cover-ups Within a few days, the media started printing and airing a series of

stories critical of the narcotic agents and protective of the drug traffick-ers and government retaliation. On April 23, 1996, Philadelphia’s Channel 3 News did a lead story, comparing the BNI agents to a group of Philadelphia police officers who created false crimes and wrongfully accused people in the 39th Precinct. That misleading television story was followed by others, including derogatory stories in the Philadel-phia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.

For reasons unknown to the agents, Supervisor Lou Gentile in the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s headquarters in Philadelphia, ordered


the narcotic agents not to correct the false media stories. These media sources had enough access to insiders to know the true story. They chose to mouth the official government line. Former Attorney General Tom Corbett told agents to “take it on the chin,” and that he wouldn’t correct the false media reports.

ACLU Protecting the Criminals ACLU lawyers stated that they intended to seek monetary damages

for the Dominicans arrested by the BNI agents. State Senator Vince Fumo from Philadelphia, urged convicted Dominican drug dealer Felix Torres to seek vengeance against the BNI agents: “Sue them, bankrupt them, take their houses from them. That’s the only time they’re going to get the message.”

Reporting the Problems to Senate Investigators McLaughlin described these activities to investigators from the

Senate Intelligence Committee, including chief counsel John Bellinger, Janice Kephart, and Al Cummings. He informed Randy Scheunemann on the staff of the National Security Advisor.

McLaughlin called Senator Arlen Specter’s office on October 15, 1996, concerning the Dominican Republic drug trafficking and the Jus-tice Department’s protection of their drug activities. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence asked McLaughlin to testify behind closed doors about the drug trafficking and other criminal activities, and the obstruction of justice at the state and federal levels.

Blocking Congressional Investigation into Drug Trafficking Seeking to prevent McLaughlin from testifying about the criminal

activities and their cover-ups to Congress, the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office sent him a memo on November 7, 1966, barring him from testifying. The Attorney General also sent a fax to Senator Specter that McLaughlin was not to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee. No reaction from Specter concerning this obstruction of justice.

Threats if He Testified Before Congress John Kelly, Regional Director for the Pennsylvania Attorney Gen-

eral office, threatened McLaughlin with termination if he testified be-fore Congress. Under federal law, this threat was a criminal act. (Title 18 USC Section 1505, 1512, 1513 and the related obstruction of justice statutes) McLaughlin did testify in executive session (secret from the public) to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on January 29, 1997. No action was taken, despite the serious implications of the testimony.

Congress took no actions when Occhipinti and his group described the serious problems, after testimony by the Pennsylvania agents, or the many other government insiders described within these pages and in


my other books. Members of Congress had covered up for major crimi-nal and even treasonous and subversive activities detailed to them by government insiders. Instead of acting as required by their positions, they joined the cover-ups.

Filing a Civil Rights Complaint Against Government Officials and Drug Traffickers In response to the obstruction of justice and retaliatory actions by

Pennsylvania and federal officials, the four agents filed a lawsuit in late 1997 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania under the Civil Rights Act and as a Bivens complaint. The complaints, filed by Pennsylvania lawyers Don Bailey from Harrisburg and Samuel Stretton from West Chester, charged the defendants with conduct that was criminal, subversive, and related to aiding and abetting the smug-gling of drugs into the United States. The introductory statement in the Complaint stated in part:

This is a civil rights complaint brought to redress, inter alia, the deprivation of the plaintiffs’ federally guaranteed interests in free speech and property. This is also a Bivens’ complaint, the gravamen of which is that a Dominican drug organization, through the protec-tion of certain persons in the State Department and the CIA, was ef-fective in having the plaintiffs’ law enforcement efforts stopped and their careers destroyed.

The plaintiffs began gathering evidence on the PRD, a Domini-can political party supported by the United States, which indicated that illegal drugs were being prolifically sold at will in the United States to our Black and Hispanic populations. This money was be-ing put into American elections.

Plaintiffs contend that they discovered a highly organized Do-minican group organized as the Revolutionary Dominican Party (PRD), a political party seeking power in the Dominican Republic, that was, and is, protected and sanctioned, unlawfully, by agencies of the United States government, to include the CIA and the State Department, enabling the Dominicans to distribute illegal drugs at will to the Black and Hispanic populations of the Eastern Seaboard.

Plaintiffs also allege that in furtherance of the unlawful policy of protecting the large-scale distributors of illegal narcotics to largely captive center city populations, the defendants have utilized the offices of the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the FBI, to pursue an oppressive threatening in-vestigation of the plaintiffs in an effort to destroy their Credibility and silence them.

These tactics include the ferreting out of plaintiffs’ information


sources so that they may be silenced [killed] through the mecha-nism of a federal grand jury. They ask this Court to appoint, or ur-gently request, a special prosecutor, independent of the Justice De-partment and either political party, to investigate the cover-up they allege in order that they and some of their sources can be saved from more abuses ... ask this court to issue an order forcing federal authorities to protect Confidential Informant “P-Man,” 902-96, who is now known to them, immediately. General Allegations In the Complaint, the four narcotic agents charged that the defen-

dants in various combinations engaged in conspiracies to: • Block government agents from halting the flow of illegal drugs into

the United States. • Allow the flow of illegally procured money from the sale and dis-

tribution of drugs in the United States into the political coffers of Francisco Pena Gomez of the PDR in the Dominican.

• Prevent disclosure and/or further discovery by the plaintiffs of the flow of illegally procured money from the sale and distribution of drugs by the PRD to black and Hispanic Americans.

• Discredit the plaintiffs in order to destroy their credibility and thus their ability to participate in the prosecution of drug traffickers.

• Protect the proceeds (money) of Dominican drug dealers and traf-fickers from exposure and prosecution.

• Protect the government conspirators, both named and unnamed, from criminal prosecution for their role in aiding and abetting the illegal sale and distribution of drugs in the United States.

“Dominicans Now Dominant in East Coast Drug Trade” A mid-1998 New York Times article was titled, “Dominicans Now

Dominant in East Coast Drug Trade.” Undercover ONI and CIA Agent Speaks Out On December 12, 1994, James Ridgeway de Szigethy executed an

affidavit admitting that Sea Crest had been a CIA operation, a fact that he had learned from his activities as an informant for the Naval Intelli-gence Service, as well as from his CIA associates.

Szigethy also revealed that the assassination of Prince Chitresh “Teddy” Khedker in New York City was committed by CIA operative George Cobo. According to Szigethy, the prince was a CIA operative involved in the Sea Crest operation in Canada and that Cobo was a Cu-ban national trained by the CIA. Szigethy provided Congressman Trafi-cant with other affidavits and documents regarding Sea Crest and the


Occhipinti conspiracy. Szigethy was previously polygraphed with re-spect to another affidavit he executed and found to be truthful.

DOJ Drops Criminal Investigation of Drug Fighters U.S. Attorney Michael R. Stiles issued a statement on February 18,

1999, announcing the closing of its investigation into suspected crimi-nal activities against the four Pennsylvania narcotic agents! No mention of any investigation into the drug traffickers and the evidence accumu-lated against them.

Gravity of the Implications The Occhipinti and McLaughlin cases provide prima facie evidence

of widespread drug and other criminal activities involving a segment of the population largely composed of immigrants to the United States. Key people in this group have connections to the CIA. There were re-peated cover-ups and obstruction of justice by almost every level of the state and federal criminal justice system, and a pattern of retaliation against those few government agents with the courage and integrity to carry out the responsibilities of their jobs.

Government Agents Form Group to Protect Against High-Level Retaliation and Right to Perform Their Legal Responsibilities A group was formed to bring together government agents who suf-

fered the type of retaliation suffered by Occhipinti, McLaughlin and others, called the National Police Defense Foundation, with its home office in Washington, D.C. The purpose of the association is to protect the rights of law-enforcement personnel and the public and to provide assistance, services, and counseling for law-enforcement personnel. Occhipinti is the executive director of the foundation. (National Police Defense Foundation, 1422 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20005.)

The Fallout from Widespread Corruption Would Be Catastrophic, Especially in New York City The protection of the drug operations, part of which funded terror-

ist cells in New Jersey, would be felt with the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, with further blowback effects on September 11, 2001. The ability of the terrorists to enter the cockpit of the four airlin-ers on 9/11 would have been blocked if the corruption I and other FAA inspectors had been acted upon; if the corruption in the Justice Depart-ment did not exist; if the cover-ups by members of Congress and others did not exist,

Evidence supporting these charges can be found in several of my books and in various government records. Again and again the public—that never seems to respond to any of these revelations—paid the price. And they surely did on September 11!


9/11 Commission Said Intelligence “Failures,” Covering Up for Intelligence “Corruption”! These documented activities that played a role in the funding of ter-

rorists subsequently involved in the attacks upon the World Trade Cen-ter clearly show that where the 9/11 Commission made reference to “intelligence failures,” the reference should have been to “intelligence corruption.”

Partial Vindication for Two Pennsylvania Narcotic Agents A jury in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania awarded $1.5 million to the

two Pennsylvania narcotic agents, McLaughlin and Micewski. A news-paper article (February 13, 2003) stated:

Mr. McLaughlin and Mr. Micewski said they had uncovered a Dominican drug-trafficking ring in Philadelphia, New York and other Eastern cities that was funneling profits to the Dominican Revolutionary party, which they said was supported by the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department. The agents said the federal government had allowed Mr. Pena Gomez to return to the Dominican Republic with $500,000 in drug profits after a 1995 fund-raising trip to New York.

The agents said that shortly after they made their accusations the Philadelphia district attorney and United States attorney’s office began questioning their credibility and stopped prosecuting their drug cases. More than 125 cases were dismissed or dropped after prosecutors accused agents of fabricating evidence and lying in court.

The agents filed a civil rights lawsuit in 1997, saying they had “become the targets of vicious unfounded attacks on their credibil-ity and careers by the federal government,” with the “marionetted support” of Mr. Corbett and the Philadelphia district attorney’s of-fice.

The lawsuit also said the Dominican Revolutionary Party “was, and is, protected and sanctioned, unlawfully, by agencies of the United States government, to include the C.I.A. and the State De-partment, enabling the Dominicans to distribute illegal drugs at will.” To this day, this culture and its tragic consequences have not been

addressed, insuring continuation of great tragedies. As will be seen in later pages, conduct of FBI and other DOJ officials would play various roles enabling terrorists to succeed in bringing down the World Trade Center buildings. The death count enabled by the FBI-DOJ culture would be somewhat higher than in 1993!


CHAPTER FIVE

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack

He first domestic aviation terrorist downing on a U.S. airliner was the missile strike on TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747 that had taken off from JFK airport in New York. Considerable evidence

pointed to a missile attack, more evidence than the NTSB had used in the past in other airline disasters to determine the probable cause.

On July 17, 1996, a TWA Boeing 747 took off from New York’s JFK airport, and as it was flying over the Atlantic Ocean within sight of people on Long Island, it suddenly blew up and fell into the ocean, kill-ing 230 people.

Dozens of witnesses saw a missile streaking up and exploding at the aircraft, some of whom appeared on television stations in the New York City area, reporting that they saw a thin streak of light going to-ward the plane, followed by an ordinance-colored explosion, and which was then followed by reddish-colored fuel-type explosions.

Missile Expert Confirmed the Missile Among the many people witnessing the ascending missile trail was

the command pilot of an Air National Guard HH-60 helicopter that had just taken off from Francis S. Gabreski Airport on Long Island. As the helicopter lifted off, Major Frederick C. Meyer saw a fast-moving as-cending streak and then a high-velocity military-type ordinance explo-sion, followed by two or three low velocity fuel-type explosions.

Meyer had seen many missiles in Vietnam and knew what missile trails look like and what they looked like when they exploded. The color of the explosion between a missile and a fuel tank were noticea-bly different. Also, the speed of the visual explosion is much faster in the missile-type explosion than in the slower rate of a fuel explosion.

T


During one of several long discussions I had with him, Meyer de-scribed to me what he had first seen as his helicopter was facing the ocean:

I saw in front of me and slightly to my left a streak of light in the sky. My reaction when I saw it was, what the hell is that? I ob-served it for approximately three to five seconds moving in a gradually ascending arc, sort of what you would observe at night if you observed a shooting star. The difference is that it was red-orange in color and it was broad daylight.

I observed the streak of light for three to five seconds. And then I saw an explosion. And about one to two seconds after that I saw a second, and possibly a third, explosion. The first was like an HPX explosion, as opposed to a “soft” explosion like gasoline.

The first left a cloud of smoke, just like a flak explosion does, almost pure white in color. The position of that explosion appeared to be slightly below and behind where one would have anticipated the streak of light to have gone. One to two seconds later, there was a second, and possibly third, softer, explosion, unlike the first one. These grew rapidly into a huge fireball four times the diameter of the sun. I was dumbstruck.

I’m recalling what I observed in Vietnam. Different things ex-ploding have different visual characteristics. If you saw a fuel stor-age depot hit, the type of explosion that would occur would be slow. The second explosion was a soft explosion. It was definitely petro-leum. I was in position to observe A-4s and F-4s hitting storage depots [in Vietnam] and watching the color of a storage depot that’s being hit and exploding. It was huge.

My copilot, Chris, said to me, “Is that pyro?” And I said to him, “No pyro like I’ve ever seen.” Because at that time, by the time those words came out, this fireball was huge.” I said, “Let’s take a look.” We flew at about 200 feet over the water, 150 knots indicated, in the direction of the fireball and the fire. Bodies In the Water The short eight miles to the falling debris was covered in about

three minutes. Meyer described what he found: I saw the body of a young woman with blond hair wearing a

white outfit, and it was in perfect condition, floating face down. She was hanging in the water like the dead man’s float. The fireball had hit the water before we crossed the beach. We estimated that it had taken approximately 10 seconds to fall.

I expected the fireball to be extinguished when it hit the water;

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 143

but it just continued to burn. And it burned across, not as a ring. The whole thing burned, and those flames were 50 feet high. We measured them because we were hovering at 50 feet over the water and we were looking at the tops of the flames.

As we approached we saw the thing fall, something fell out of this plume of smoke that was following the fireball into the water. Something fell out. We observed something like a vortex inside the fireball. I saw something fall out of it. [Varying Descent Rates of Plunging Objects]

As we approached the fireball, I told Chris to slow down. We were moving at about 150 knots, and I could see debris falling out of the sky. I was looking at debris, fuselage, aluminum skin, stum-bling in the air. Now, if you shred an aircraft and it tumbles in the air, it’s falling at somewhere up to 40 miles an hour and it’s falling in an erratic way. They spin and flop.

Right in the middle of this field of falling debris, some of it burning, there are subjects moving down at terminal velocity of 160 and 180 knots. If you do any parachute jumping, you are falling at pretty close to 180 knots. Thinner guys fall at about 160 knots. I’m presuming that these were seats, and there were people in them, were falling at 160 to 180 knots.

Now, they couldn’t have debris tumbling, lightweight debris tumbling in the air, falling past my field of vision in the same field with objects moving at terminal velocity if they had emanated from the same spot at the same time. [People First Blown Upward]

The logical answer to me is that the heavy stuff had to go some-where else first, before it came down, or it wouldn’t have come down and been passing the slower moving objects. That indicated to me that these seats had been blown vertically upward, with the people in them. They had to be blown vertically up to zero accel-eration and then start down.

We went to the fireball area and we decided immediately that we would not go downwind, because now we had a lake of fire. The ocean did not quench this at all. It was burning in the middle. It was burning at an incredible intensity. These flames were 50 feet high. The helicopter was hovering at 50 feet on the radar altimeter and we’re looking at the top of the flames.

We knew that if we tried to go downwind we’d probably get into the smoke and the exhaust. And if we weren’t choked ourselves, the engines might be choked and we’d go down. So we went to the northwest end arc, and began working around to the southwest. We eventually reached the southwesterly hemisphere of this lake of fire at between 50 and 100 feet, looking for anything associated with the aircraft.

The first things we saw on the left side of the aircraft were four


bodies. I told my copilot who was flying, “Turn and check them out.” We came down to 40 feet to shake them up with the rotor wash. There was one guy wearing a T-shirt and dungarees. Chris said, “Looks to me like they’re all dead. We left them, looking else-where for possible survivors.

As we moved around this arc on the windward edge of the fire, we saw some debris. The first thing we saw that indicated that we had an aircraft was the section of the plastic lining that is in most commercial airliners where the windows are. You see an almost square window with the corners rounded and there’s usually a shade that you pull up and down. So now we knew we had an air-craft down.

We went further around the arc and we saw this huge airfoil, which looked like a wing, but it was the rudder. The rudder on the 747 is so damn big. This thing was partially out of the water; par-tially elevated and partially sunk.

We saw more debris as we started working our way around to the southeasterly side of the fireball. When we got there we came upon a cluster of debris of all kinds; honeycomb metal, seats, and a cluster of 30 to 35 bodies. We went down to 40 feet, shaking them up with the rotor wash looking for any signs of life. We saw what looked like a raft. When we got closer we realized that it was a par-tially inflated escape slide, the type you see on a commercial air-liner. There was nobody in it. Attached to that slide was a flashing strobe light that automatically activates when the emergency evacuation slide extends.

At this point the tower contacted us and told us that air traffic control just reported that they lost radar contact with a 747. When we heard that we realized that there’s another 200 people out here”

The sun was now starting to set and it’s starting to get dark. I told Chris that I wanted to start a creeping line search, using a half-mile space. I wanted it oriented 2-4-0 and I wanted a creeping line search. That’s a search where we basically fly sideways and we fly and then we move forward a half a mile, and then we come back across the same path again. We basically fly a back and forth pat-tern moving, advancing at the end of a two-mile track, and we move forward a half-mile. Convinced It Was a Missile, Based on Vietnam Experience Meyer was convinced that what he saw was a missile. He said, “I

spent a number of years in Vietnam and had seen missiles fired, some of them at me.” He said the streak was red-orange in color, followed by a yellowish-white explosion that looked identical to the detonation of an antiaircraft shell.

Meyer sought to report what he had seen. He stated that govern-ment investigators had treated him perfunctorily and had not asked him

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 145details of what he had seen or his conclusion, despite the fact that he had far more experience than the FBI and NTSB investigators as it per-tains to missiles and missile explosions.

Meyer started speaking out when the FBI and NTSB ignored the heavy evidence of missile sightings and blaming the disaster on an air-craft defect. The FBI had given him and his copilot a gag order preventing them from giving interviews about what they had seen. Meyer said, as reported in Aviation Week:

I’m not a professor with a Ph.D. in explosion watching, I’m an eye-witness. I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion. And whatever I saw, the explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event. It was one of the results. Something happened before that which was the initiator of the disaster. Everyone involved in the FBI and NTSB is intelligent enough to know that. Meyer’s Appearance Before FBI, NTSB, and Industry Groups During a discussion before a group consisting of aviation

personnel, including an agent from the FBI and an investigator from the NTSB, Meyer referred to the lack of interest given to his observations by the NTSB and FBI:

I went to the FBI trailer office and said to the FBI agents, “I was the pilot of the helicopter that witnessed the events relating to TWA Flight 800; do you want to interview me?? Two agents said, “Oh, yeah.” And then, as an afterthought, they took me into a back room and said, “Well, go ahead and tell us, and they turned on a small handheld tape recorder.” I basically told them my story and then asked, “Do you have any questions? They said no. I was in the trailer about six minutes.

[Explaining Characteristics of Different SAM Missiles] I’ve seen three types of missiles while in Vietnam: SAM-1s,

SAM-2s, and SAM-7s. A SAM-7 is a wild looking thing coming at you, because it comes at you like a corkscrew. But a SAM-1 and SAM-2 go through the air with a slight wiggle but smooth flight path. These missiles leave smoke trails.

A SAM-1 and a SAM-2 leave a trail 10,000 feet long in the air. A SAM-7 leaves a trail too. You can see these damn spirals after the missile is gone. And matter of fact, what you’re probably seeing is the smoke because the missile’s moving too fast to be seen.

This thing that I observed was a very steady path. And it wasn’t a long time. It was maybe five seconds total. It was a very steady thing. It didn’t have an erratic smoke trail. It didn’t appear to have an erratic flight path. Enlarging Upon What He Saw At a later date, Meyer stated to me in a clarifying Email (July 13,

2002):


I saw a fast moving streak crossing the sky, my left center to my further left, in a gradually descending arc. I observed the streak for about 3-5 seconds. It then disappeared for about one second. Then I saw on the same trajectory and further to my left a high velocity ordinance explosion. It was yellow white in color with black smoke. Military ordinance. Two and a half seconds later, further to my left but lower, I saw a second high velocity explosion.

This appeared to be brilliant white light, like an old fashion flash bulb. Very little smoke, but what there was, was white-gray. Two and a half to three seconds later, further to my left and still lower, I saw one, possibly two, nearly concentric, nearly coinciden-tal high velocity explosions so close in location and time that I/m not sure if there were one or two. From that same point immedi-ately came the low velocity fuel explosion. The fireball, trailing a column of thick black smoke, fell to the sea.

I did not immediately determine that the streak was a missile. It looked too smooth for the missiles I had seen in Vietnam. I thought more of some sort of “Schallenwerfer,” (rocket propelled artillery shells) until I spoke with Richard Goss, an eyewitness who had been sitting on the porch of the Westhampton Yacht Squadron club-house having lunch. He heard a noise and looked up to see the mis-sile climbing straight up in front of him.

He told me he then saw it make a sharp turn to the Southeast and head out to sea. Paul Angeledes saw the same thing. I then knew that the reasons the missile/s path was smooth was because it was in a hard turn. It had acquired its target at max deflection and was turning hard to center the target in its cone of acquisition. The turn did not look that sharp from my aspect because I could detect only the vertical vector, not the horizontal vector. “We just saw an explosion.” The pilot of Eastwind Flights 507 told air traffic controllers what

he saw as TWA Flight 800 exploded in front of him, as he made one of the first reports of the explosion:

We just saw an explosion up ahead out there at about 16,000 feet or something like that. It blew up in the air and then we saw two fire-balls go down to the water. There was smoke coming up from that. Also, there seemed to be a light. I thought it was a landing light on. It was coming right at us at about 15,000 feet or something like that. And then it blew. One of the pilots on Alitalia Flight 609 also confirmed the explo-

sion. His report was followed by one from Virgin Atlantic Flight 009. A private pilot, Sven Faret, with a passenger, Ken Wendell, were flying a


small single engine plane at 8,500 feet over Riverhead, Long Island, on a 090 degree heading, with a view of the flight path of TWA Flight 800. He later made a report of what they saw:

Ken pointed out traffic at 3 o’clock low (actually 2.30). Sven saw a white light steady in the sky. My first impression was landing lights pointed towards us putting it in a northerly direction. Ken saw two lights very close together. A short “pin flash of light” ap-peared on the ground (perhaps water). Very shortly thereafter the white light exploded instantaneously into a huge red-orange ball. My initial response was, “Who’s shooting fireworks tonight?” The magnitude of the fireball, and altitude, quickly (less than a second) ruled that out.

Immediately thereafter a large fireball emerged from the bot-tom of the initial fireball, accelerating straight down, as if it had just started to fall. Like a teardrop it drew with it a tail of fire down to the water surface. We watched intently as the descending fire fell closer to the water. Sven was awaiting the fire to illuminate the wa-ter surface as it fell. At the same moment a pilot reported it to the controller on 118.00. [radio frequency]

A second pilot responded and then we reported it. We saw it hit the water, lighting up the surrounding surface very well. Large splashes could be seen around the fire. The fire on the surface was relatively small, but was spreading quickly. I asked Ken, “What was that!” It’s probably the National Guard boys losing a C-130 or something. Maybe they shot down one of their own planes.”

We proceeded to fly over to the smoke cloud. As we crossed the shoreline I looked down and saw three boats enroute to the fire, about 25 percent of the way. I estimated the flames to be 6-7 miles offshore.

We watched intently seeing a flashing light at the SE edge of the flames, but it soon stopped. We observed a steady blinking light drifting SW away from the scene. Ken said it appeared to be a heli-copter just west of the flames. Sven thought it could have been a marker beacon on a life raft. This was about 5 plus minutes after the explosion.

We approached the black-gray smoke cloud on the west side. We were at 7700 feet and were at the top edge of the cloud. The cloud center was at 7500 feet. There were two small bumps upon it. There was no smoke or smoke trails about it. It was still lit up a lit-tle by the sun, clear above. There was a tornado like tail leaving the bottom of it leading down to the flames.

It had a small arc in it as the winds gently moved the cloud NNW. I said to Ken, “I have an eery feeling about this place, what even stung this thing could sting us too. Let’s bolt out-a-here.” We


swung north. As we were turning, we saw two-engine commuter traffic above us at 8000 plus, traveling NW. We called Flight Ser-vice on 122.6 and reported what we saw. We flew back to Riverhead and east. Over Mattituck Airport we decided that the event had to be enough of a finale for the evening. We called approach on 132.25 for clearance back to Islip. We also told that controller what we saw. Among Hundreds of Other Witnesses Similar missile reports came from over 200 people who saw the

missile trail; many of them professionals, such as police or firemen. Lou Desyron, one of several fishermen who saw the missile trail, told ABC World News (July 21, 1996), “We saw what appeared to be a flare going straight up. We thought it was from a boat. It was a bright red-dish-orange color.” Similar reports came from over 200 people who saw the missile trail, many of them professionals. While Linda Kabot was taking pictures at a fund-raiser dinner for Mayor Vince Cannuscio at East Quogue Beach on Long Island a blast was heard nearby, while her camera recorded an object streaking upward.

While Linda Kabot was taking pictures at a fund-raiser dinner for Mayor Vince Cannuscio at East Quogue Beach on Long Island a blast was heard nearby. Her camera, which was recording the event, recorded an object streaking upward.

An anonymous letter appearing in the October 1996 California Sun (Ojai, California) described the experience of a California couple who were vacationing on Long Island at the time of the blast and who saw the missile trail. They made a report to the FBI about the missile trail, and received a reaction many others received. His letter stated in part:

They questioned us in separate rooms and made us feel like crimi-nals. They said that what we must have seen was a shooting star or some fireworks being shot from a boat. I told them that it was not anything like that at all. I said that it was definitely a flare type rocket heading toward the aircraft; then it exploded. It was then suggested that we did not see anything at all and that we were go-ing along with what other people said they saw. Just for the excite-ment of it. I told them, “No way, I know what I saw...They scared the hell out of us.” Numerous reports surfaced of FBI agents warning people to remain

quiet about their knowledge of a missile sighting. Blatant Nature of FBI People Lying to the Public During a November 1997 FBI press briefing, FBI personnel stated

that the missile trail that people reported was actually burning fuel from


the ruptured fuel tanks on TWA Flight 800 as it climbed to 3,000 feet. The FBI sought to support their hoax with a video prepared by CIA personnel. The video implied that the sequence commenced with the center fuel tank exploding, which caused the entire front part of the aircraft to break off, exposing the cabin to the onrushing air. The video then indicated that the 747—minus its entire front section—then climbed several thousand feet, trailing flames. It was the trailing flames which people on the ground thought was the missile trail. Only an un-sophisticated public and a complicit media could accept such a bla-tantly false scenario.

When the various fuel tanks exploded, they exploded into giant fireballs that no one could possibly confuse with the pencil-like streak of a missile. Nor did this explain the military explosive color that Meyers had witnessed prior to the exploding fuel.

Further, having flown military and commercial aircraft almost con-tinuously since 1942, I cannot comprehend any airliner, missing its en-tire front and the entire circumference of the cabin exposed to the on-rushing air, climbing 3000 feet. And as Meyers and others saw, the plane went down, not up, after the explosion.

Nevertheless, the majority of the public accepted the obvious de-ception from government officials, despite the long and expanding his-tory of lying that has become standard and a prerequisite for advance-ment in public offices. I had first-hand experience with the cover-ups by the political NTSB board starting while I was a federal air safety inspector in the area that fueled the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history. Even NTSB investigators admitted this problem to me.

“Reassembling” TWA Boeing 747 Most of the aircraft was subsequently recovered and “reassembled”

in a hangar at Calverton on Long Island. It was discovered that the front of the aircraft, shortly behind the flight station, had broken off first, and the aircraft fuselage was then like an open tube.

Initial Media Reports Identified Explosive Residue The New York Times printed an article stating that the plastic ex-

plosive traces, PETN, was found on the wreckage. Being advised of the pending article, James Kallstrom and Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick were summoned to Washington to coordinate a response to that article that would have undermined the fabricated cause of the dis-aster.

A Reuter article (August 25, 1996), titled, “Investigator: Nitro Found In TWA Wreck,” stated:

Traces of the flammable liquid nitroglycerin have been found in the wreckage of TWA Flight 800 bolstering the theory that an explo-


sive device destroyed the plane, the New York Daily News said in its Sunday edition. The report by the Daily News comes just two days after the New York Times said traces of PETN, a chemical compound commonly found in both plastic explosives and surface-to-air missiles, was found on a piece of seat from the Boeing 747’s passenger cabin.

Another Reuter article (August 30, 1996), titled, “More Explosive

Traces Found in TWA Debris,” stated: Investigators have found more microscopic traces of explosives

on debris from TWA Flight 800 but said they could not conclude that a bomb or missile caused the plane to crash last month, offi-cials said Friday. Other traces of chemical explosive were found on the plane’s wreckage last week.

Although investigators officially said they were “of unknown origin,” they have said privately that PETN, a chemical used in plastic explosives, was found on a piece of a passenger seat located near the center fuel tank where the two wings join the fuselage. CBS News reported on Friday that a compound found in the wreckage was “strikingly similar” to one discovered at the crash site of Pan Am Flight 103, which exploded over Lockerbie, Scot-land, in 1988 killing all 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground.

CBS News said it had learned that the FBI lab had identified resi-

due of a plastic explosive called “RDX” found on a curtain in the rear of the jet. It said the discovery further bolstered the bomb theory be-cause “RDX and PETN are mixed together to make high-powered ex-plosives.”

An aviation expert and a law enforcement official who is an explo-sives specialist told the newspaper they saw several fist-sized holes punched through the backs of two seats on the far right side of row 23. That is in the center of the area pinpointed by the computer as the site of the initial blast. The microscopic traces of PETN also were found in that general area. No similar holes have been found in other seats.

An aviation expert, and a law enforcement official that was an ex-plosives specialist, told CBS that he saw several fist-sized holes punched through the backs of two seats on the far right side of row 23. That is in the center of the area pinpointed by the computer as the site of the initial blast. The microscopic traces of PETN also were found in that general area.

Numerous media reports also published similar articles as a result of their own investigations. But suddenly, all such articles disappeared,


as if they were simultaneously ordered to halt the reports by citing na-tional security or some other pretext.

Several other media reports published similar articles as a result of their own investigations. But suddenly, all such articles disappeared, as if they were simultaneously ordered to halt the reports on the pretext of national security.

NTSB Continuing Decades of Cover Ups A five-day NTSB hearing started on December 8, 1997, and under

normal hearing procedure, the NTSB must examine all the material evidence during its investigation, and dozens of missile sightings far exceed the material evidence that the NTSB had used in the past to make a determination as to the cause of the aviation disaster.

However, FBI personnel ordered the NTSB not to allow any evi-dence or reference to the missile that nearly 200 people saw prior to Flight 800 blowing apart. The NTSB complied, and during the hearing, attention was limited to those areas for which there was not a shred of evidence; an aircraft electrical malfunction that caused a spark to occur, exploding the fuel in the center fuel tank.

The NTSB sought to support its center fuel tank theory with the ar-gument that the air conditioning units, situated near the center fuel tank, heated the fuel and that made the Jet fuel to explode.

I’ve taken aircraft full of more explosive fuel, gasoline that had been sitting in the hot desert sun in Saudi Arabia and, as with thousands of other flights by thousands of other pilots, never experienced the slightest trouble.

Unprecedented Misinformation and Cover-Up Justice Department and NTSB board members were fabricating

implausible theories while refusing to give credit to the heavy evidence of a missile strike. This repeated what I had discovered as a federal aviation safety inspector, the massive and blatant cover-up of the actual cause of the disaster. In my book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centu-ries, I detail many instances of such misconduct.

Unprecedented Misinformation and Cover-Up Media people did not report the blatant cover-up. Justice Depart-

ment and NTSB officials were fabricating implausible theories while refusing to give credit to the heavy evidence of a missile strike. It was another example of what I had seen for the past 30 years, starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent discovering the cover-ups—not by the professional NTSB investigators—but by the political NTSB board members.


President Bill Clinton Assuring That Air Travel was Safe Nine days after Flight 800 exploded, President Bill Clinton assured

the public that “air travel remains the safest means of transportation.” That would change as more terrorist air disasters occurred.

Deadly Consequences of Cover-Ups Were Known for Years Several points are raised here. First, covering up for the true cause

of the downing of TWA Flight 800, by calling it a fuel tank problem—when there was not a shred of evidence for that, diverted attention from the terrorist act. Second, no one asked for the testimony of the govern-ment’s professional air safety agents who had more expertise in these matters than the politicians and others being called.

But there was a bigger problem. Great numbers of members of Congress had received my detailed letters that went into specific areas of misconduct in the FAA that prevented the federal government from meeting its air safety responsibilities. That included many areas, includ-ing aircraft security against hijackings and bombs and airport security, in addition to the many other known safety problems that preceded dozens of prior fatal airline crashes.

Members of Congress and other people in government had repeat-edly covered up for the crash-causing problems in the FAA, and by their cover-ups, many fatal crashes were allowed to occur. Records ex-isted of this cover-up, both in letters, federal lawsuits, and my books. That bar to addressing the core issues, which cannot be corrected with-out public exposure and punishment of some of the guilty, will remain for decades, long after I am gone and the records not available.

Included in the recommendations made in the July 1997 final re-port of the Gore Commission were the following: • Install explosive detection equipment at U.S. airports. Five years

later, this had not been done. However, even when such detection equipment is installed, it has a high false and false positive rate.

• Conduct criminal background checks of people who work at air-ports, including caterers, mechanics, and others. Same time lapse.

• Require airlines to match passengers with bags that go into the cargo compartment of the aircraft. If the passenger does not board who belongs to that bag, the flight must be delayed until that bag is found and removed. The thinking being that someone who puts a bomb in his suitcase won’t board the aircraft. However, the increas-ing hatred for the United States is causing people to willingly sacri-fice themselves. Five years later, this baggage matching started—but only due to public outrage from a terrorist attack yet to be de-scribed.

• Install smoke detectors and fire extinguishing systems in all aircraft


baggage compartments. No one asked why this obvious necessity was not required by the FAA, and why FAA management elimi-nated this previous requirement when the jets came into service. Scheme Involved Corrupting the Investigation Into the Downing of TWA Flight 800 FBI agent James Kallstrom was put in charge of the investigation

into the downing of TWA Flight 800. Kallstrom’s initial statements to the media were that it was a crime scene and therefore the FBI was tak-ing responsibility away from the NTSB. U.S. Attorney Valerie Caproni ordered NTSB investigators not to conduct any interviews, including the many witnesses who saw the missile streak, and that NTSB investi-gators would be limited to reviewing, but not copying, documents sup-plied by the FBI. This unprecedented obstruction of a major aviation disaster had only one purpose: to block the discovery and report of the actual cause of the disaster.

I describe in great detail in my book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries, the obstructionist tactics I repeatedly encountered by DOJ personnel and the alteration of the actual cause of several major airline disasters.

The FBI order to NTSB investigators violated the clear language of Title 39 § 1131(a)(2) that provides responsibility for all aviation disas-ters to the NTSB:

An investigation [of airline accidents] by the Board has priority over any investigation by another department, agency or instrumen-tality of the United States Government.

The Blatantly Ridiculous Video FBI and CIA personnel then fabricated a ridiculous video claiming

that the thin missile streak that hundreds of witnesses saw was really the exploding aircraft climbing 3,000 feet. The massive fireball engulf-ing the allegedly climbing aircraft obviously didn’t meet the appear-ance of a thin pencil-like missile trail of a surface-to-air missile. Nor would an aircraft, with its entire front section broken off, climb 3,000 feet!

It started dawning upon FBI-DOJ officials that if the downing of TWA Flight 800 was called a terrorist act it would reflect upon the FBI’s failure to act on the insider information they received from a key al Qaeda operative through Scarpa. In addition, if Scarpa’s value and credibility became known, it risked exposing still another FBI problem: the murders and other crimes involving FBI Supervisory agent Lindley DeVecchio.


To compound this even more, it risked exposing the murders of U.S. citizens involving FBI agents in the Boston office, which had been going on for over two decades, and which investigative reporters for Boston area newspapers were starting to expose. Details in my book, Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, and the Mafia.

Determined to Expose the Cover-Up One person determined to expose the NTSB and FBI cover-up was

James Sanders, whose wife was a TWA flight attendant instructor. He managed to get a small swatch of seat covering material from a TWA pilot, Terrell Stacey, who was outraged by the FBI, CIA and NTSB cover-ups. Stacey worked in the hangar where Flight 800 was being “reassembled” and obtained a small piece of the hundreds of yards of seat material that he felt showed signed of explosive residue. His inten-tion was to have the small swatch analyzed by giving it to former Cali-fornia police officer James Sanders. Sanders’ wife, Elizabeth, was a supervisor in TWA’s flight training department. They all wanted the truth to come out.

Sanders had a California laboratory test the fabric and found red residue from a seat cushion that tested positive for explosive residue. Sanders later wrote the book, The Downing Of Flight 800. In retaliation for taking this insignificant piece of fabric and seeking to help discover the existence of explosive residue, Justice Department prosecutors charged them all with a criminal offense.

Just prior to the start of the NTSB hearings in Baltimore, Justice Department personnel issued arrest warrants for James and Elizabeth Sanders, insuring that they would not be present during the hearings to disturb the NTSB cover-up. The trial against the Sanders commenced in April 1999 and ended with the jury handing down a guilty verdict on April 13, 1999. The judge sentenced James Sanders to three years pro-bation and 50 hours of community service. Elizabeth received one-year probation and 25 hours of community service. Probation means check-ing with a probation officer on a regular weekly or monthly basis, and is not total freedom.

A Reuter article (August 25, 1996), titled, “Investigator: Nitro Found In TWA Wreck,” stated:

Traces of the flammable liquid nitroglycerin have been found in the wreckage of TWA Flight 800 bolstering the theory that an explosive device destroyed the plane, the New York Daily News said in its Sunday edition. The report by the Daily News comes just two days after the New York Times said traces of PETN, a chemi-cal compound commonly found in both plastic explosives and sur-face-to-air missiles, was found on a piece of seat from the Boeing


747’s passenger cabin. Sudden Reversal by FBI Officials Kallstrom, who had earlier been vocal in holding that the downing

of TWA Flight 800 was a criminal act, suddenly reversed himself. Working with CIA officials, none of whom had aviation expertise, they blamed the downing of TWA Flight 800 on a fuel spark in the center wing fuel tank, contradicting the overwhelming evidence provided by the missile sightings. They produced a video showing the center wing fuel tank exploding, the front of the aircraft breaking off and exposing the cabin, and the disintegrating 747 aircraft climbing 3000 feet in a massive fireball. This required a compliant media and a gullible public.

FBI-CIA personnel claimed that the missile streak that witnesses saw was really the flaming aircraft climbing 3,000 feet after the fuel tank exploded. One of several problems with that scenario was that there is a major difference between the thin bluish missile trail that wit-nesses saw and the massive red fireball surrounding TWA Flight 800 after the fuel tanks exploded.

Further, an aircraft with its entire front section missing, with the open cabin facing the onrushing air, wasn’t about to climb 3,000 feet. In addition, pilots in the area saw the stricken plane plummet down-ward after the initial explosion; not climb upward.

Also debunking the spark in the center fuel tank claim was the fact that ten years after the FBI-CIA, and then the obliging political NTSB board, fabricated that scenario, neither the FAA, the NTSB, Boeing, or any of the world’s other users of Boeing 747 aircraft, have made any changes to the center fuel tank.

Shutting Down the “Investigation” Having settled on the spark in the center fuel tank hoax, Supervi-

sory Special Agent Kenneth Maxwell, carrying out Washington orders, told Kallstrom to shut down the investigation.

Lap Dog Media Assists in Their Usual Cover-Up Ignoring the CIA, FBI, and NTSB deception, and the overwhelm-

ing evidence of a missile strike, most of the media, parroted, as usual, the government’s line. But some went even further. Time magazine’s December 22, 1997, issue expanded on this deception by stating that the government determined the cause of the crash to be mechanical. But the NTSB hearing provided absolutely no evidence of the spark in the center fuel tank theory. At the same time, they ignored the over-whelming evidence of the missile.

Seeking Court Order to Obtain Evidence There were exceptions, at least up to a point. An article in the San

Francisco Chronicle (December 17, 1977) relating to evidence being


covered up by the NTSB stated: New York. TWA and Boeing asked a judge yesterday to help

them get evidence from the criminal investigation into the TWA Flight 800 explosion statements from people who thought they saw a missile near the plane. The lawyers made the appeal to U.S. Dis-trict Judge Robert W. Sweet during a routine pretrial hearing in the case brought by some of the families of 230 people who died in the July 17, 1996 disaster. Steve Bell, a Boeing lawyer, said the companies had been denied

evidence relating to the criminal investigation by the FBI and the Na-tional Transportation Safety Board. Bell said evidence that could show a jury that a bomb or missile may have caused the disaster was “obvi-ously relevant. It means somebody else is responsible, not Boeing.”

More Intrigue I appeared as a guest on the Los Angeles radio show hosted by Pe-

ter Ford, the son of Glenn Ford and actress Eleanor Powell (December 4, 1996), along with Jeremy Crocker, who had conducted considerable research into the downing of TWA Flight 800. He interviewed people in different parts of the United States. Crocker, who built the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway, had taken an interest in Flight 800, and had done considerable research into it. Shortly after the show, Crocker dis-appeared, and at the time of this writing, he had not been found.

An article in the Palm Springs Press-Enterprise (October 28, 1997) was titled, Man’s Disappearance Remains A Mystery, and stated:

The disappearance of civic watchdog Jeremy Crocker while re-searching the crash of TWA Flight 800 last year has left his two sons baffled and searching for any information their father is still alive. Crocker, a longtime Palm Springs resident whose father built the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway, was last seen Dec. 9 at the downtown Los Angeles library where he did much of his research on the crash. His preoccupation with the airline crash included countless hours of research in libraries and on the Internet. He did not trust the government’s probes of the crash. Adverse Effects if Government Admitted a Missile There were several possible reasons for the government cover-up of

the missile. First, the mere fact that my letters had exposed FBI and CIA personnel acting in a way that they knew surface-to-air missiles would fall into the hands of terrorists would look bad if the media chose to address that fact. By aiding terrorists get several dozen to a hundred surface-to-air missiles would surely pose grave dangers for


U.S. aircrafts and the media could imply that it was one of those mis-siles that brought down TWA Flight 800. Also, with numerous missiles now in the hands of terrorists, any future downing of a U.S. airliners could be associated with the FBI-CIA cover-up actions.

Years Afterwards, No Changes to 747 Fuel System In 2004, the FAA delayed the implementation of the fuel tank

changes for an additional four years, clearly indicating that this was not considered a threat to safety, and probably not the blame for the demise of Flight 800. For years thereafter, there were no material changes made to the Boeing 747s center fuel tanks, providing further indication that the NTSB—which has less expertise than the huge Boeing Com-pany—really did not believe that the explosion of the center fuel tank (and the other fuel tanks) was due to an internal spark. Four years later, in 2004, the FAA delayed the implementation of the fuel tank changes for an additional four years, clearly indicating that this was not consid-ered a threat to safety, and probably not the blame for the demise of Flight 800. In 2008, there still was no requirement.

My Prior Warnings of Missile Attacks to FBI and Congress There were multiple reasons for covering up the terrorist aspects of

TWA Flight 800. The first one. Shortly before the downing of TWA Flight 800, one of my CIA sources, Ronald Rewald, who had previ-ously been the head of a major covert CIA operation based in Hono-lulu, BBRDW, had given me information of surface-to-air-missiles be-ing offered at no charge to the United States. He was involved in nego-tiations occurring at Long Beach, California, involving an Afghanistan warlord—who offered the missiles—and CIA-FBI representatives. For some inexplicable reason, the missiles were rejected, and would then be offered for sale to other terrorists. (Further details in Defrauding Amer-ica.)

Rewald had been part of the negotiations and was concerned after the missiles were rejected, knowing they would then be sold to terror-ists. He gave me information about the meetings and documentation, including the serial numbers of the missiles being offered.

I immediately contacted members of Congress, explaining the situation and the dangerous blowback consequences from rejecting the missiles. I urged them to immediately contact me and my CIA source in an effort to obtain the missiles before they were sold to terrorists. Every member of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees was con-tacted by mail. Not a single one responded. Among the members of Congress who received copies of the letters was Senator Arlen Specter, and a copy of that letter follows:


From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 510-944-1930; FAX 510-295-1203 October 20, 1995 Senator Arlen Specter United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Certified: P 427 892 268

Ref: Refusal by CIA and Justice Department officials to accept the “gift” of 30-40 Stinger missiles, suggesting a hidden agenda, with possible catastrophic consequences in shooting down commercial airliners.

Dear Senator Specter:

My sources in the intelligence community have recently given me details

of efforts by Afghani rebels to turn over to the United States, without charge, 30 to 40 Stinger missiles (SAM), with a possibility of an additional 100 mis-siles thereafter. Incredibly, this offer was rejected by Justice Department and Central Intelligence Agency officials. There is a strong probability that one or more of these rejected missiles will be used to shoot down commercial airlin-ers. If this occurs, not only will the carnage be horrendous, but it will inflict severe financial havoc upon the aviation industry and upon air travel. The fol-lowing is a brief description of what has transpired:

Synopsis of CIA and Justice Department Tactics Insuring That the SAM Missiles Will Be Available to Terrorists Recent information provided to me by one or more of my many contacts

in the CIA community described the dates, places, and people involved in of-fering the missiles to the United States, and the rejection of this offer. These sources provided me with precise details of the negotiations to give the mis-siles to the United States, the agreement by Afghan rebel leader, General Rashid Dostum, and a CIA attorney.

CIA headquarters was initially made aware of the offer through a letter sent by a former CIA agent whom I have known for about five years, and whom I consider very honorable and reliable. That letter went unanswered. The agent, concerned about the consequences of commercial airliners being shot down with these missiles, then contacted another CIA employee at CIA headquarters, who then tried to force a response from high CIA officials. This latest action forced CIA officials to finally respond.

Negotiations then commenced, which involved, among others, the former CIA agent who headed a major CIA proprietary in Hawaii; a CIA attorney in the Los Angeles area; an Afghani located in California; and an Afghani rebel general in Afghanistan (who had previously turned over 20 Stinger missiles to the United States).

The general agreed to turn over the missiles without cost to the United States, and simply requested the release of an Afghani being held in federal prison on a drug charge arising from a possible KGB setup. At the same time that the Afghan general was offering to give these missiles to the United

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 159States, these same missiles were being sought by terrorist groups who bid large amounts of money for them. One obvious possible use for these missiles in terrorist hands would be to shoot down commercial airlines.

Incredibly, CIA and Justice Department officials rejected the offer, insur-ing that the missiles would fall into the hands of terrorists, where some of them may be at this very moment.

The Afghani initially offered to give to the CIA 30 to 40 Stinger (follow-ing an earlier return of 20 Stinger missiles), with a possibility that 100 more would be delivered thereafter. The CIA and Justice Department requested se-rial numbers for several of the missiles to determine that the missiles were actually available. These serial numbers1 were then provided, and the numbers were confirmed by U.S. authorities as authentic.

After telephone contact was made with this Afghan general (General Dos-tum), a written agreement was signed by a Los Angeles area CIA attorney, the Afghani in California, and the former CIA agent who the Afghans were using to insure that the CIA and Justice Department kept their word.

Knowledge of corrupt CIA and Justice Department activities My prior experience as a federal and then a private investigator, and a

confidant to many former CIA and other deep-cover people seeking to expose government corruption, has enabled me to recognize the corrupt conduct of these two government agencies. I strongly feel that this rejection indicates a secret agenda that could inflict additional great harm upon America. This con-duct would be compatible with the corrupt activities and harm that I have de-tailed and documented during the past 30 years of attempts to expose the ac-tivities of corrupt government officials and employees.

Possible Reasons For Refusing The Missiles There are several possible reasons for the CIA and Justice Department re-

fusing to accept the missiles, and each of them is in character for these two groups. Two of these reasons are listed here:

Attempt to prevent exposure of an earlier CIA and Justice Department scandal. The offer to provide the missiles at no charge went through a former CIA agent who was made the titular head of a large and covert CIA proprie-tary in Hawaii: Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham and Wong (BBRD&W). This covert operation that was based within the United States (Honolulu) had offices in 17 countries, and replaced another CIA operation and scandal known as Nugan Hand Bank with headquarters in Australia. After a Honolulu televi-sion station blew the cover on BBRD&W, officials in control of the CIA and Justice Department sought to cover for the CIA operation by fraudulently charging with criminal conduct the head of that CIA proprietary.

If the missiles had been accepted, it is possible that this sacrificed agent would be identified and the massive fraud involving the Hawaiian and Nugan Hand operations would then surface. (Exposure of this type of misconduct would reveal that the Justice Department’s conduct at Ruby Ridge and Waco are only the tip of the iceberg.)

CIA need for continuing crises. Another possibility for CIA and Justice Department rejection of the Stinger missiles is that the CIA wants the missiles to fall into terrorists’ hands, and actually wants an airliner to be shot down.


The shoot-down of a commercial airliner could then be used to justify the con-tinuation of CIA activities. This scenario is not as bizarre as it sounds when a person understands the history of corrupt CIA and Justice Department activi-ties and the great harm inflicted upon the United States through criminal ac-tivities. I describe these activities in books that I have written, Defrauding America and to a lesser extent, Unfriendly Skies.

A Prior Air Tragedy Involved With CIA-DEA-Justice Department Misconduct Pam Am 103. Despite the cover-up by the CIA and Justice Department

(and by Congress and much of the mainstream media), substantial evidence indicates that the Pan Am 103 tragedy was made possible by CIA-DEA mis-conduct associated with a pattern of illicit drug smuggling into the United States. My deep-cover contacts, along with information obtained from other sources, indicates that the CIA and DEA had an established drug pipeline from Nicosia and Beirut into the United States using Pan Am aircraft. Pan Am’s involvement started at Frankfort, Germany.

Ironically, one of the same DEA agents involved in that drug pipeline, Michael T. Hurley, was used to retaliate against a witness who testified to Congress concerning the Justice Department’s involvement in the Inslaw scan-dal. Justice Department officials retaliated against Michael Riconosciuto for testifying before Congress about the Justice Department’s involvement in the Inslaw scandal. This is a routine criminal misuse of Justice Department offices and power. Officials prosecuted Lester Coleman, a former intelligence agency asset who blew the whistle on the CIA-DEA involvement in the Pan Am tragedy. Justice Department officials prosecuted Juval Aviv in retaliation for uncovering evidence showing CIA-DEA involvement in that tragedy. (I have a long list of others who were fraudulently prosecuted to silence them, including the long persecution of me in retaliation for exposing these crimes against America.)

Pattern of Congressional and Media Cover-up None of the corrupt government activities that I identify could continue

without the criminal cover-up by members of Congress and by most of the U.S. mainstream media. I repeatedly offered to provide evidence to you and other members of Congress (and the media) of hard-core criminal activities involving federal officials, and the only response was silence (i.e., misprision of felonies, cover-up, obstruction of justice). This same misprision of felonies has put many citizens in prison (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4), even though they were less guilty than government officials, members of Congress, and the media, who have a greater responsibility to report these crimes.

On the surface, although very serious, this missile matter does not appear to have the subversive and criminal nature of other criminal conduct that I exposed. However, it demands a full, open, congressional investigation.

Fortunately for everyone involved in these criminal activities, the main-stream media has kept the lid on the scandals, and most Americans are too preoccupied with trivia, and totally unwilling to meet their responsibilities under our form of government.

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 161Vested Interest in Continuing the Cover-up Based upon 30 years of experience in attempting to expose hard-core gov-

ernment corruption, starting while I was a federal investigator, it would be my expectation that you will cover up this matter. For many years, and especially during the past five years, I have made you aware of criminal activities2 in-volving government employees and officials, including corrupt officials within the Central Intelligence Agency, the Justice Department, and crooked judges. Each of you therefore have a vested interest in preventing the American people from learning about these criminal activities3 and what has been done to the American people.

But there is the possibility that despite the media cover-up, and the pub-lic’s incredible illiteracy about government misconduct, that a small percent-age of the American people will learn about it and demand justice. If one or more commercial aircraft are blown out of the sky, your prior knowledge will be publicized. So you have a dilemma as to what to do with this information. You certainly can’t meet your responsibilities by turning this information over to the same Justice Department that is corruptly involved with the various criminal activities that I brought to your attention.


cc: Broadcast and print media. Every member of the Senate and House intelligence Committees via identical letter.

ENDNOTES

1. The Stinger missiles serial numbers provided by the Afghans included the following: Lot Nos. GDP 84D 001-320 362956; GDP 84J 001-320 363602; GDP 86G 001-387 369587; GDP 84G 001-320 363387.

2. The criminal activities that Stich initially discovered while a federal in-vestigator included: (a) widespread and deeply entrenched pattern of CIA and DEA drug smuggling into the United States, aided and abetted by persons in employed by Customs, Justice Department, and other government agencies and branches; (b) converting federal bankruptcy courts into criminal enter-prises through looting of assets by a conspiracy consisting of federal judges, trustees, covert Justice Department and CIA law firms; (c) CIA involvement in looting U.S. financial institutions, including the savings and loans; (d) CIA scheme known as “October Surprise,” and its cover-up; (e) Inslaw corruption involving Justice Department personnel and federal judges; (f) Operation Mount Rushmore, a CIA/Mossad scheme to assassinate presidential candidate Bill Clinton in San Francisco; (g) criminal cover-up and obstruction of justice by Justice Department personnel, federal judges, and others, of each of these and other crimes; (h) felony persecution of informants, whistleblowers, and protesting victims by federal judges and prosecutors; (i) involvement of Cali-fornia judges in helping to carry out several of these schemes, including a ten-


year pattern of judicial acts against Rodney Stich while violating blocks of California and federal statutes and constitutional protections, making them co-conspirators.

3. It is a criminal offense to threaten any person who seeks to report fed-eral crimes.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an infor-mant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bod-ily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another per-son, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or pos-sible commission of a Federal offense ...

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness/informant. Applies to anyone who (b) uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another per-son, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to (1) influence, delay or prevent that person’s testimony in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to (A) withhold testi-mony; or withhold a record from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impart the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a ... judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense, ...

1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens

another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to

(1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding: shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both. [1988 amended reading]

4. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of felony). “Whoever, having knowl-edge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Continuing the Pattern of Cover-Up Not one of the two dozen members of Congress responded to the

letters, despite the fact that I was a former federal safety agent, that I had insider information from the former head of a major secret CIA operation, that I was stating facts, and the enormity of the consequences if my statements were true and the information was ignored. This is the same type of contemptible conduct that I had seen of vast numbers of members of Congress prior to that time, and which continued thereaf-


ter, to this very day. There were serious ramifications to their repeated cover-ups.

Over Two Dozen Airliners Downed by Missiles, and The Standard Pattern of Cover-Ups Continued Despite the fact that over two dozen commercial airliners had been

downed by missiles since 1980 in Africa and Asia where there has been civil unrest, and there was no question that U.S. airliners would be tar-gets due to the increasing hatred against the United States, members of Congress and media people kept this information from the public and took no action. As before, the consequences would be deadly.

I also sent letters to many members of Congress that had oversight responsibilities over the FAA, and those with oversight over the intelli-gence community, involving the surface-to-air missile matter that I had previously brought to their attention. Despite my highly unusual avia-tion background combined with insider knowledge of the missiles, not a single recipient responded.

Type of Missile Unknown What type of missile caused Flight 800 to explode is not known. If

it was a Stinger missile, one of hundreds given to the Afghan rebels in the 1980s, or one of those Stinger missiles that were acquired by terror-ists when the CIA and FBI rejected them. My brother-in-law worked on surface-to-air missiles for Raytheon, the company that made the Stinger missiles. He confirmed that the missiles were rated to fly to at least 13,000 feet and could be expected to go higher.

The stinger missile is hand-carried and weighs about 35 pounds. It is almost six feet long and launched from a lightweight launcher that is reusable. They were first put into service in 1981. The missile tracks an aircraft using an infrared sensor that detects heat from the aircraft’s ex-haust and tracks on it.

The missile operator puts the missile into its launcher tube and arms the system. When the target aircraft appears, the person arms the infrared sensor while pointing the launcher at the target aircraft. When the sensor detects and locks onto the target engine’s exhaust system, a steady high-pitched tone is emitted, indicating that it is ready to fire. A trigger is then pulled and the missile takes off. The solid fuel rocket motor travels at Mach 2, and when it hits the aircraft, 6.6 pounds of high explosives detonates.

Offering Post-Disaster Missile Information to FBI Personnel After the downing of TWA Flight 800, I offered to provide informa-

tion to the FBI about the missiles. FBI Agent James Kallstrom who ini-tially controlled the investigation ignored my offer.

Someone put a copy of that letter on the Internet, and this became known to the FBI. On July 24, 1996, two FBI agents contacted me and


wanted to meet with me, which I did. But they didn’t want any infor-mation on the rejected missiles. Their only interest was to warn me to remain quiet about what I knew. In a phone call that took place about a hour after we met, Special Agent V. Stewart Daley warned me to re-main quiet about the missiles. I told him that I encountered FBI cover-up for the past 30 years, starting while I was a federal investigator, and I was not about to remain silent now.

To make a record of the FBI’s meeting I sent the following letter (July 30, 1996) to the FBI describing the events as I saw them: From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 510-944-1930; FAX 510-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Disavow, & Unfriendly Skies Member Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot

July 30, 1996

V. Stewart Daley, Special Agent Federal Bureau of Investigation 1850 Gateway Blvd, Suite 1010 Concord, CA 94520 Certified: P427 892054

Ref: TWA Flight 800; SAM missiles offered to US and rejected; and July 24, 1996 meeting with FBI agent. Dear Sir: The purpose of this letter is to make a record relating to what transpired

during a meeting and subsequent telephone conversation between myself and FBI agent V. Stewart Daley on July 24, 1996: • The San Francisco FBI office contacted me on July 24, 1996, arranging

for a meeting that afternoon between myself and FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, which did occur, outside of the Rossmoor Diner in Walnut Creek, California.

• The purpose of the visit by FBI agent Daley was supposed to discuss the letters that I had sent to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees on October 20, 1995, and a copy of those letters to FBI agent Jim Kallstrom on July 21, 1996. Kallstrom is the lead FBI agent in charge of the criminal investigation involving TWA Flight 800.

• The intent of my October 20, 1995 letter to those members of Congress was to alert them to a very serious matter, requiring their immediate atten-tion, that would otherwise probably culminate in one or more missiles be-ing acquired and used by terrorists to shoot down commercial airliners.

• Prior to my sending that October 20th letter, one of my many CIA sources had expressed concern to me in October 1995 that surface-to-air missiles (SAM) would be made available to terrorists by the inexplicable actions of Justice Department and CIA personnel. My source described his par-

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 165ticipation in the efforts of Afghan rebels who were offering 40 to 60 mis-siles to the United States, through the Justice Department and Central In-telligence Agency, at no cost to the United States. They also advised that an additional 100 missiles may also be made available. The only consid-eration attached to this gift of SAM missiles was that a young son of one of the rebel leaders be released from federal prison at Terminal Island. He had been convicted of a drug-related offense.

• It was known to these Justice Department and CIA employees that terror-ists were offering $100,000 each for several of these missiles. Knowing this, and knowing that the missiles would probably be used to shoot down commercial airlines, Justice Department and CIA officials refused to ac-cept them. This CIA source recognized this probable consequence of the rejection, and conveyed his concern to me. He then provided me with suf-ficient documentation to establish the truth of his statements, including copies of letters to and from the Justice Department, serial numbers of some of the missiles, and other data. Informing Congress of Impending Shoot-down of Passenger Airliners

• I then informed each member of the House and Senate intelligence com-mittees through that October 20, 1995 letter, making them aware of the probable shoot-down of a passenger airliner if they did not immediately intervene and seek to halt the sale of these missiles to terrorist groups. I made it clear that I had documents to support these statements and could provide them with other information. I urged them to immediately contact me for further information.

• Despite the horror that would probably follow failure to take im-mediate actions, not a single member of Congress contacted me.

• My credibility could not have been an issue. Those letters provided infor-mation on my background, including years as a former federal investiga-tor in the Federal Aviation Administration, a member of sophisticated in-telligence and aviation groups, a writer of highly technical, detailed, and documented books, and long experience in these areas. Standard FBI Cover-up and Obstruction of Justice

• During this July 24, 1996 meeting with FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, I de-scribed in general terms the nature of the missile problem and the possibility that TWA Flight 800 was shot down by a missile, and that other passenger airliners would probably be shot down by the missiles made available to terrorist groups by the conduct of these Justice Department and CIA officials. I also made it clear that I was using this meeting to make the FBI aware of other criminal activities that I had discovered. These were major criminal activities inflicting death upon many people, and were inflicting great harm upon national security. These criminal ac-tivities included, among many others:

• Pattern of FAA corruption related to a series of airline crashes and deaths. I detailed and documented these activities in the third edition of Un-friendly Skies, the second edition of Defrauding America, in thousands of pages of testimony and evidence placed into a FAA hearing that I forced upon the agency. I charged the existence of deeply entrenched FAA cor-ruption (and corruption at a major airline) associated with a series of fatal airline crashes that I and other federal inspectors had uncovered as part of our official duties. These corrupt activities were made known to high level management in the FAA, NTSB, Justice Department, and to members of Congress, some of whom had already been advised of these problems by


other FAA inspectors. They all covered up, making possible the continua-tion of the FAA culture, the air safety misconduct, and the resulting crashes. This mindset continues, making possible many of the airline crashes that continue to occur.

• Pattern of corruption implicating high-level federal officials relating to long-standing drug trafficking into the United States, This would include evidence that I have accumulated for the past seven years (and longer) from my many CIA and other deep-cover sources. Heavily involved in this cover-up (and prosecution of whistleblowers) are Justice Department employees and federal judges, as described in part in my two detailed and documented books.

• Massive corruption in the Ninth Circuit bankruptcy courts, looting the assets of people who exercise the statutory protections of Chapter 11, un-aware of the enormous fraud involving judges, US and private trustees, law firms, and lawyers.

• Justice Department cover-up of the CIA-DEA drug pipeline, misusing Pan Am aircraft, making possible the placement of the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, and the fraudulent prosecution of people who seek to expose the truth. There is similarity between Justice Department cover-up be-tween the two TWA mishaps in the New York City area and the Lockerbie disaster. This cover-up of the CIA-DEA drug pipeline has protected the terrorists who actually placed the bomb on board Pan Am 103. It was the illicit activities of CIA and DEA personnel that made possible the place-ment of the bomb on board the aircraft, making these US employees partly responsible for the bombing and deaths. Cover-up of Tragedy-Related Corruption Combined With Threats To Remain Quiet

• Shortly after I returned home from that meeting, FBI agent Daley con-tacted me by phone, and warned me not to repeat any of the information that I had provided to him. He had no interest in any of these criminal matters, despite the gravity of the matters and their harmful effects upon national security.

• No interest was shown in any of these areas by FBI agent V. Stewart Daley, including specifics on the missiles.

• I reminded him that he had a duty under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4, and other criminal statutes, to arrange for me and my sources to give evidence to a proper investigative body. He repeated his warning that I keep this in-formation to myself. How the American Public Has Paid For These Crimes and the Cover-up

• TWA Flight 800. If this flight was actually shot down by a missile, the matter of Justice Department and CIA rejection of the SAM missiles is of grave concern to the United States. What agenda do these officials have that are subjecting the United States to such tragic consequences? And if TWA Flight 800 was not shot down by a missile, when will the missiles, in the hands of terrorists, be used to shoot down a passenger airliner?

• Further complicating this matter is the refusal by any of the two dozen members of the Senate and House intelligence committees to obtain from me the confidential data that I have acquired after they received that ur-gent letter. They also appeared willing to sacrifice the lives that would very probably be lost through missile attacks.

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 167• Cover-up behind the downing of the TWA Flight over Staten Island many

years ago, killing everyone on board. A prior tragedy befalling TWA, within miles of the downing of TWA Flight 800, was associated with criminal misconduct on the part of FAA management (and others), and occurred on a program for which I held federal air safety responsibilities shortly after that tragedy occurred (the world’s worst at that time). Evi-dence of this relationship (and of the criminal misconduct in other airline crashes occurring in my area of federal air safety responsibilities) is found in the records of an unprecedented four-month-long FAA safety hearing (E20GFAA) that I forced upon the FAA while holding federal authority to make such determinations. During that hearing I acted as a prosecutor, producing official documents and testimony to support my charges. FAA legal staff and the top aide to the FAA administrator engaged in cover-up during the hearing, in perjury, subornation of perjury, that continued the FAA culture, the serious air safety and criminal violations, which then caused or made possible other crashes in my area of air safety responsi-bilities.

• This hearing was preceded by several air disasters on programs for which I had federal air safety responsibilities, followed by identical air disasters (plus two air disasters occurring during the hearing). These activities were accompanied by cover-up involving officials in various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice, members of Congress, and others. They all played a role in the deaths associated with the specific air disasters.

• Harm to national security, to US institutions, and the deaths of many peo-ple, and establishing a corrupt culture in government institutions, espe-cially the FAA, Justice Department, and Central Intelligence Agency. FBI Reaction To This Pattern of Tragedy Related Criminality Despite the gravity of the matters brought to your attention, and to other

divisions of the Justice Department by a former federal investigator, no at-tempt was made to receive my evidence and testimony, and that of my sources.

Your telephone conversation consisted of a warning for me to remain quiet. This coincides with prior actions and inactions of Justice Department officials. It is of interest that a federal criminal statute provides for any citizen to report a federal crime to a federal judge (or other federal tribunal), and if a citizen fails to promptly do this, he has committed a criminal act. It should be of great concern to Americans that every attempt to report these criminal acts to federal judges has been judicially blocked. These judges, with the assistance of Justice Department employees, have prevented me from making such re-ports. They have rendered orders barring me from federal court access, which blocks me from making the reports that they are required to receive under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4. The two books, Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding Amer-ica detail and document these and many other examples of misconduct involv-ing federal employees.

Sincerely, Rodney Stich cc: Janet Reno, U.S. Attorney General, Constitution Avenue and 10th

Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530. FAX 202-514-4371. Internet; Senate Intelligence Committee FAX 202-224-1772; House Intel-

ligence Committee FAX 202-225-1991.


Mole Within al Qaeda Terrorist Group Other areas of intrigue that surely played a role in the cover-up, and

had to do with conduct of FBI-DOJ personnel who knew of that and other planned terrorist attacks and covered up for the insider informa-tion, making them possible. It was like having a mole in the al Qaeda organization. The full details are in the book, Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, and the Mafia, but I’ll give highlights here.

Prior to the downing of TWA Flight 800, Al Qaeda operative Ramzi Yousef was confined to the federal holding facility in Manhattan wait-ing trial for his role in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Yousef and another al Qaeda operative occupied two separate cells. Occupying the cell between them was Gregory Scarpa, Jr., waiting trial on various criminal charges resulting from his role as a soldier in the Colombo Mafia family in New York.

During many personal conversations, Scarpa represented to Yousef that he and his Mafia group were also interested in attacking U.S. tar-gets. In this way, Scarpa obtained the confidence of the al Qaeda opera-tive and learned from Yousef that al Qaeda was planning to bomb U.S. Embassies in Africa, bomb a U.S. airliner, and hijack U.S. airliners.

Scarpa started keeping FBI personnel informed of what he was learning from this key al Qaeda operative. Local FBI agents provided Scarpa a miniature camera to photograph notes that Yousef was passing to Ismail through Scarpa, who was in a cell between the two al Qaeda operatives. The FBI agents made FBI 302 reports of what Scarpa was reporting to them about the planned terrorist attacks.

After Scarpa told Yousef that he had a company that Yousef could call from prison, that would relay his phone calls to al Qaeda operatives in and out of the United States, the FBI set up the fake company, Roma Corporation, and staffed it for months with FBI agents that received calls from Yousef and transferred them to al Qaeda operatives in and out of the United States, while recording what was stated.

Local FBI agents valued the information provided by Scarpa, and promised Scarpa that they would seek a reduction in his prison sentence for the valuable aid Scarpa was providing. FBI ADIC James Kallstrom, assigned to the New York office, was aware of the information given by Yousef to Scarpa Jr. Kallstrom told Scarpa’s attorney, Larry Silverman, that he considered the information obtain by Scarpa very valuable. Ac-cording to author Peter Lance in his book, Cover Up, Kallstrom told Silverman that the information obtained by Scarpa was very valuable, stating, “Don’t let Scarpa stop now.”


But There Was a Problem! There was a problem with recognizing the valuable information

about planned terrorist attacks that Scarpa was providing to Scarpa. Scarpa was privy to information that would be extremely damaging to FBI and other DOJ officials. Scarpa’s father, Gregory Scarpa Sr., also known as the Killing Machine, had been secretly working with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio in the FBI’s New York offices. The two of them were engaging in murders of U.S. citizens, in bank robberies, and other crimes. This relationship had existed for years, and known to higher DOJ officials, who ignored the relationship for various reasons.

While lower-level FBI agents recognized the value of the informa-tion on the planned terrorist attacks that Scarpa was providing as an insider in the al Qaeda organizer, higher FBI-DOJ official refused to act on the information. If FBI-DOJ officials acknowledged the credibility of Scarpa’s information and took measures to prevent the planned ter-rorist attacks, Scarpa would be recognized as a credible source. And this credibility would go to Scarpa’s expected testimony that would include testimony about the murders and other crimes perpetrated by a FBI supervisor in the New York offices: Lindley DeVecchio, and the complicity of higher FBI-DOJ officials who knew of this relationship and covered up for it. Despite the reports by other FBI agents, the deci-sion at high FBI-DOJ level was to discredit Scarpa’s information on the planned terrorist attacks.

Terrorist Attacks on Schedule, Including TWA Flight 800 The bombings of U.S. Embassies in Africa that Yousef told Scarpa

would occur, did occur. One was the August 7, 1998, bombing of the U.S. Embassy in the Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. The downing of an airliner, which Yousef told Scarpa would occur, did oc-cur, with the downing of TWA Flight 800. The hijackings of U.S. air-liners also occurred, as will be described in later pages.

Danger to Careers if a Missile was Reported The conduct of Justice Department and CIA officials described in

my letters to Congress threatened to expose their conduct in making it possible for terrorists to obtain the SAM missiles. Questions could be asked as to why they acted to make missiles available to terrorists, and members of Congress could suffer from disclosing their cavalier atti-tude in response to my urgent letters. In addition, the question arose as to where and when a U.S. airliner would be shot down by the rejected missiles.

After TWA Flight 800 was downed, I made the media aware of the role played by Justice Department and CIA officials that made possible the acquisition of surface-to-air missiles by terrorists by rejecting the


“gift” of the missiles. Virtually none of the major mainstream media responded, insuring that this relationship would be kept from the pub-lic.

Continuing Cover-Up by Media People As the first anniversary of the downing of TWA Flight 800 ap-

proached, the CBS network television program, EXTRA, spent half a day filming me and my letter to members of Congress warning of mis-sile attacks upon commercial aircraft. I had already been cancelled at the last moment on four prior network shows during the past year (in-cluding CNN, CBS, and CBN) and I thought my appearance would probably be scratched in this case also. I was right.

What may have assisted in this cancellation was turning over one of the documents relating to the Afghan-Justice Department missile negotiations that had the name of the CIA’s lawyer on it. By contacting this lawyer, pressure could be expected to be applied to the EXTRA television producers to remove me from the program. And that, of course, was done.

I wrote a letter to producer Jackie Pratt at the Glendale, California studios, reminding them that by covering up for the rejected missile matter they were keeping the public from learning about missiles that might have been involved in shooting down TWA Flight 800 and were in terrorist hands for possible shooting down of airliners in the future.

After Effect of Terrorist Cover-Up One aftereffect of the cover-up of a terrorist attack on TWA Flight

800 was continued failure of the government air safety agencies to fo-cus on that threat. Terrorist attacks on commercial aircraft have oc-curred for the prior 40 years, and recognition of the terrorist attack on TWA Flight 800 could arouse sufficient public outrage to force the FAA and other government agencies to finally focus meaningful attack on the subject.

Using Downing of TWA Flight 800 for Political Points Political points were made of the downing of TWA Flight 800.

President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, instead of the FAA administrator that had aviation safety responsibilities, stated they were taking action by convening a committee called the Al Gore Commis-sion. An article in the Wall Street Journal (July 11, 1997) titled, “Much Talk, Little Action,” described the absence of any government action on the threat of explosives on airliners. The article stated:

Everybody has just gotten back to business as usual. … We didn’t have the courage to do anything. We just went through the motions. The public realized the Federal Aviation Administration really wasn’t providing the security. It’s as if they discovered the


emperor had no clothes. Coming on the heels of the ValuJet Air-lines crash in the Florida Everglades, the TWA disaster occurred when the nation’s air –safety system was already under scrutiny. Media coverage of both crashes was intense—leading to a public outcry for political action.

Politicians paid heed. Congress soon began holding a series of hearings on air safety and security that culminated in the passage of a bill designed to change the way victim’s families are treated after crashes. Perhaps the greatest gesture was the creation in August of the commission led by Vice President Al Gore—the first such air–safety commission since the bombing of Pan Am 103. The initial Gore Commission report was mostly about security, but now that terrorist doesn’t appear to be the cause, “the hype has all gone away,” says Mr. Broderick, the former FAA official. A Seattle Times article (December 10, 1999), headlined, “Boeing

says TWA crash deed of ‘external source’” stated: The Boeing Co. said this week that the lack of evidence as to

what sparked the blast that downed TWA Flight 800 three years ago, points to an “external source,” such as a bomb or missile. Boe-ing’s statement in court documents Tuesday is the strongest to date revealing an aggressive legal defense that blames the 747 crash on a bomb or missile—which the FBI and National Transportation Safety Board long ago ruled out.

That the NTSB in over three years of exhaustive investigation has been unable to identify any potential ignition source aboard the aircraft suggests that an external source caused the explosion,” Boeing said. “Unless and until such time as a cause is determined, ignition sources external to the aircraft—of any type—cannot be ruled out.” Boeing consultants, the company says, have had only limited access to the wreckage. [These statements] came on the heels of microscopic testing on the wreckage of TWA Flight 800 demanded by Boeing. Seeking Court Order to Obtain Evidence

An article in the San Francisco Chronicle (December 17, 1977) related to evidence being covered up by the NTSB:

New York. TWA and Boeing asked a judge yesterday to help them get evidence from the criminal investigation into the TWA Flight 800 explosion statements from people who thought they saw a missile near the plane. The lawyers made the appeal to U.S. Dis-trict Judge Robert W. Sweet during a routine pretrial hearing in the case brought by some of the families of 230 people who died in the


July 17, 1996 disaster. Steve Bell, a Boeing lawyer, said the companies had been de-

nied evidence relating to the criminal investigation by the FBI and the National Transportation Safety Board. Bell said evidence that could show a jury that a bomb or missile may have caused the dis-aster was “obviously relevant. It means somebody else is responsi-ble, not Boeing.” Lawyers and Next-Of-Kin Opposed Missile Evidence Plaintiff lawyers and next-of-kin were unhappy with Boeing’s posi-

tion. They would lose money if the cause of the crash were due to a terrorist act, and not any fault of Boeing. One discouragement I experi-enced during my many years of exposing the corruption that caused or allowed to occur a number of specific fatal airline crashes, for which I had evidence, is that not a single next-of-kin ever offered to help ex-pose these matters. Their only interest appeared to be associated with filing lawsuits to seeking money, which insured the continuation of crashes and deaths that could otherwise have been prevented.

Years Afterwards, No Material Change To 747 Fuel System For years thereafter, there were no material changes made to the

Boeing 747s center fuel tanks, providing further indication that FAA and NTSB politicians never believe that the explosion of the center fuel tank was due to an internal spark.

Navy Commander Believed Missile Downed Flight 800 Commander William Donaldson, III, head of a group known as As-

sociated Retired Aviation Professionals, which included former gov-ernment investigators, believed the true evidence of the crash was being covered up. Donaldson told World Net Daily:

There’s no question that TWA Flight 800 was hit in the left wing. The missile appears to have been one in a series of what they call MANPADS missiles. That’s a man portable air defense system. Common name is “shoulder-fired missile.

In 1994 there was a French Mistral missile that was fully loaded ready to fire on its tripod. One man carries the missile and another man carries the tripod, and it’s an extremely potent point defense missile. The Maryland state police found it alongside a country road near Westminster, Maryland. Donaldson died in 2001. Call From Former TWA Pilot After I had appeared as guest on a Las Vegas radio show (Decem-

ber 11, 1997) discussing TWA Flight 800, a friend of mine, Hoot Gib-


son, who heard the show, called me at home and told me about a conversation he had with another TWA Boeing 747 captain. (A movie had been made years earlier of a jet upset in which Hoot was the cap-tain and saved the aircraft at the last moment.)

Hoot said that the TWA captain had taken off from JFK shortly be-fore TWA Flight 800 had taken off, and was heading for Rome. TWA flight operations called this captain shortly after TWA Flight 800 went down and told the pilots what had just happened to Flight 800 that had taken off shortly behind him.

An Alitalia aircraft had taken off after TWA Flight 800 and the TWA Captain called the Alitalia crew, asking them to change over to a discreet frequency. During the subsequent radio conversation, the TWA captain told Hoot that the Alitalia pilot said that he saw the missile go-ing up toward TWA Flight 800, and that after TWA was hit, the plane rolled over on its back and then plunged into the ocean. Hoot said that he recorded the telephone conversation. He also added that the same captain who had told Hoot of this conversation didn’t want to talk about it any more.

An article in the national weekly edition of the Washington Times (December 29, 1996) stated:

An official with the Defense Intelligence Agency, spy arm of the Pentagon, has informed congressional staff members that, in his opinion, a shoulder-fired missile brought down TWA Flight 800. The same DIA official, described as an expert in missile technol-ogy, told the staff members that he personally was called in by the FBI in the days following the explosion of the TWA jet to assist with witness interviews, a source present for the congressional briefing told Inside the Beltway last week. No Mechanical Faults Were Discovered An Aviation Week and Space Technology article (December 1,

1997) stated that the NTSB tests cleared the fuel pumps on the center fuel tank from possible blame. At no time during the entire NTSB “in-vestigation” was there found any evidence of an ignition source that could have ignited the small quantity of fuel in the center fuel tank of Flight 800.

Another indication of an explosion from outside the aircraft was indicated by a CNN report (September 5, 1997):

Federal officials investigating the crash of TWA Flight 800 are baffled by the recent discovery of impact damage on the doors that close over the front landing gear. According to several people in-volved in the investigation, for the last two weeks National Trans-portation Safety Board investigators have been trying to figure out


what could have caused the nose gear doors to blow inward, and whether whatever caused that damage happened before the plane’s center fuel tank exploded.

Examiners who have been looking at crash wreckage for the past 13 months are now said to be mystified about the significance of the damage on the doors, which are located below the flight deck and well forward of the plane’s center fuel tank. The investigators are equally troubled by the fact that these nose gear doors were among the first things on the plane to have come off in flight.

One crash investigator told CNN on Friday that the discovery keeps open the question of whether the fuel tank explosion was the primary or secondary event in the in-flight breakup of TWA Flight 800. But Shelly Hazle, an NTSB spokeswoman, downplayed the significance, emphasizing that investigators will have to see how this newly discovered evidence fits into their theory of how the plane blew up.

Cover-Up of Sensitive Information Standard Practice by Political NTSB Board Members While I was a federal air safety agent, I had frequent contacts with

NTSB investigators. They frequently complained about NTSB board members, who are usually aviation ignorant political appointees, who change the analysis of the cause of an aviation crash determined by the professional accident investigators.

The reports of the NTSB investigators, reported by the media, ap-pears to reflect this problem as the NTSB investigators reported evi-dence of an external explosion while the board members took the oppo-site position. The alteration of a government report, such as omitting facts that materially changes the accuracy of that report, is a criminal offense. And I repeatedly describe this alteration by the NTSB political board in my book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries.

Many Warning Letters: No Responses! I had sent many letters to members of congress, to the U.S. Attor-

ney general, to the head of the FBI, and others, advising the recipients of major threats affecting the nation’s aviation sector, national security, and other matters. I advised them that I, a former federal agent, and a group of other government agents, had discovered as part of our official duties, areas of corrupt and criminal activities in key government of-fices, including the government’s aviation safety offices. I also pro-vided highlights of the criminal and even subversive activities implicat-ing people in key government positions.


One such letter was sent to U.S. Attorney Robert Mueller at San Francisco. His cover-up permitted conditions to continue that would make possible 3,000 deaths on a single day in the world’s worst terror-ist aviation tragedy, while he was the head of the FBI, the agency that had blocked my reports from my days as a federal air safety agent. From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Member Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association

March 20, 2000

Robert S. Mueller, U.S. Attorney Federal Building 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94101

Ref: For the record: criminal retaliation under Title 18 U.S.C. § 15121

To Mr. Mueller, Several things you should know. Judge Marilyn Patel may try to misuse

your office to charge me with criminal contempt of court. This arises from an unlawful and unconstitutional order that she rendered about 13 years ago that forever barred me from federal court access and the protections under the laws and Constitution of the United States. The order also sought to continue block-ing me and my group of government whistleblowers from reporting very seri-ous criminal activities involving people in key government positions.

Judge Patel rendered that order after I sought to report to a federal judge under the mandatory crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4,2 criminal activities which I had been documenting from my early days as a federal in-spector-investigator for the Federal Aviation Administration, and which I have learned from a group of government whistleblowers that have come to me.

I recently submitted a lawsuit to the U.S. district court in Oakland, raising a number of federal issues under the Civil Rights Act, under Bivens, under the Declaratory Judgment Act, and as another federal issue, I reported a number of criminal activities and demanded to produce evidence, as required under the mandatory crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Associated with her misuse of judicial office and the courts, including obstructing justice, her ac-tions were criminal in other areas. This letter describes those offenses.

Also, a certain provision in law caught my attention, which suggests your office may have a responsibility to protect whistleblowers like myself. I found this information in the congressional comments relating to 18 U.S.C. § 1512. As provided in Section 6 of Public Law 97-291, as amended Pub.L. 98-473, Title II, § 1408(b), Oct.12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2177, some form of relief is provided for victims of such retaliation:

(2) Notification of availability of protection. BA victim or witness should routinely receive information on steps that law enforcement officers and law-yers for the Government can take to protect victims and witnesses from intimidation.

Since your office and the Department of Justice is delegated the responsi-


bility of halting civil rights violations, especially against whistleblowers, and in light of the fact that criminal acts have been inflicted upon me as a result of my whistleblower activities, your office has a responsibility. Keep in mind that no one, and especially a federal judge, has the authority to void for the re-mainder of anyone’s life, the rights and protections to all citizens guaranteed under the laws and Constitution of the United States.

Pattern of Corruption Affecting Nation’s Aviation Safety A little background information would help understand the sequence of

retaliation for reporting federal crimes. I was a federal investigator for the Federal Aviation Administration when I first discovered a pattern of air safety and criminal acts at United Airlines and the cover-up by certain FAA manage-ment personnel that caused or allowed to occur a series of fatal airline crashes. My reports of these matters are documented. I, and other federal inspectors reporting these matters, suffered threats, harassment, and retaliation. This re-taliation and interference with federal air safety responsibilities made possible other crashes and other deaths. I acted as an independent counsel and forced a four-month-long hearing upon the FAA during which I caused to be entered into the records testimony and exhibits proving that these matters did exist. I then suffered more retaliation. Such retaliation preventing air safety inspectors from performing their federal duties is a crime under Title 18 U.S.C. § 1113 (which brought into play other federal violations, including Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 354 and 345, 1001.6

This interference with the duties of a government agent, combined with the corruption and criminal activities, forced me to leave government service. To this date, no one has been brought to justice for the federal offenses associ-ated with the deaths of many people.

After I left government service, I continued to investigate and expose in-ternal FAA problems that continued to play a role in other airline crashes. I continued my exposure efforts by publishing books, appearing as guest on over 3,000 radio and television shows, and occasionally filing federal actions seeking to force a federal judge to perform his or her duty. These actions were filed under Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 1621,7 1622,8 and 18 U.S.C. § 4. That was the start of documenting judicial cover-ups and judicial obstruction of justice, fed-eral crimes which eventually escalated into retaliation that became crimes un-der Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505,9 1510,10 1512,11 241, among others. Probability the gravity of the corruption kept the judges from allowing the lawsuit to pro-ceed.

After my second edition of Unfriendly Skies was published, naming spe-cific people in government, including federal judges, a San Francisco law firm filed a sham lawsuit against me that targeted the assets that funded my expo-sure activities. At that time my assets totaled approximately $10 million in real estate properties, which I had acquired as a former airline captain and riding the crest of escalating real estate values.

That lawsuit was barred by dozens of state and federal statutes, rules of court, Supreme Court decisions, and major constitutional protections. For the next six years, California judges at every level openly violated these due proc-ess protections. They compounded these violations by retaliating against me for exercising due process remedies. This retaliation is a crime under the clear language of Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Strangely, every level of the California ju-dicial system protected the perpetrators of these violations, and refused to per-form their duty to prevent the continuation of these violations. This failure to

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 177perform a duty under the Civil Rights Act12 made them culpable under, for instance, Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986.13

I then exercised federal remedies that were specific for the violations oc-curring. These remedies were provided by the Civil Rights Act on the basis of the civil rights violations, for a declaratory judgment under the Declaratory Judgment Act. The duties of federal judges under Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201,14 2202,15 were to declare my personal and property rights as established in seven judgments, which the California judges were violating in the California law-suit.

Despite their duties to provide a federal court forum and relief and the Civil Rights Act and Declaratory Judgment Act, federal judges refused to act. Events indicated that the intent was to destroy the $10 million in property as-sets that funded my investigations and exposure of high-level corruption in government.

While these attacks upon me continued, I also continued my investiga-tions and accumulations of additional evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

Starting in 1985, my activities eventually motivated other government agents from the FBI, CIA, DEA, Customs, and Secret Service, to provide me with evidence of still other criminal activities implicating people in key gov-ernment positions.

With this information, I exercised my responsibilities under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, and sought to report these addi-tional criminal activities to federal judge via a federal court filing. I combined my demand to produce evidence of these criminal activities to the other federal issues, seeking relief under the Civil Rights and Declaratory Judgment Acts. From that point on, the misuse of federal judicial positions escalated into the area of outright criminal violations. Briefly, here is the sequence of judicial acts that followed: • Federal judges refused to address the criminal matters that I had stated and

refused to receive the evidence that I and my group of government agents offered to provide. The judges most directly involved with the refusal to receive evidence offered under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 were Sacramento dis-trict judges Milton Schwartz, Raul Ramirez and Magistrate John Moulds, and San Francisco judges Marilyn Patel and Vaughn Walker. This refusal to receive evidence of criminal activities constituted criminal acts related to obstruction of justice. The type of evidence my group sought to provide affected the internal security of the United States.

• In addition, after refusing to receive the evidence and dismissing the ac-tions, Judges Schwartz and Patel rendered orders in the late 1980s forever barring me access to the federal courts, and voiding for me, under the class of a whistleblower, all rights and protections under the laws and Constitution of the United States. These orders were, of course, unlawful and unconstitutional, and intended to do two things:

• One was to prevent me and my group from reporting the criminal activi-ties involving people in key government positions. This, of course, ob-structed justice and is a crime.

• Second, it was to eliminate for me the many federal remedies available for the onslaught of judicially perpetrated violations of federally protected rights. I suffered very great losses as a result of the judicially perpetrated conspiracy of civil rights violations that were combined with criminal acts.


• In addition to refusing to receive evidence of high-level criminal activi-ties, federal judges refused to perform their mandatory duty to provide a federal court forum and relief under the specific statutes intended for the federal issues raised in the complaint.

• Recognizing that the orders making me literally a man without a country, depriving me of the rights and protections under the laws and constitution of the United States, were unlawful and unconstitutional, and experienc-ing great harm from the escalating violations of federally protected rights, and also learning of additional criminal activities, I filed other actions as provided by federal law. I also had the right, under Title 28 U.S.C. § 241, to report wrongdoings by federal officials.

• I was in a Catch-22 situation. Stripped of all rights to federal court access and the protections guaranteed under our form of government, I was si-multaneously suffering great harm from the misuse of the judicial posi-tions. These actions even included taking my life’s assets consisting at that time of $10 million. Among the many harms I suffered was the taking of my life’s assets, valued at $10 million, by Las Vegas judge Robert Smith. The orders were rendered in chambers, without the due process require-ment of a noticed hearing, a hearing, legally recognized cause, and other violations of law. The orders also falsely stated there had been a hearing on that date, when there was no hearing.

• Federal judges then retaliated against me. First it was in Sacramento and involved Judges Schwartz, Raul Ramirez, and Magistrate John Moulds. Later, it was San Francisco judges Patel and Walker. From about 1987 to 1995, I was continuously being charged with criminal contempt of court for seeking relief guaranteed by law from the pattern of hard-core civil rights violations. In one case, Oakland judge Edward Jellen charged me with criminal contempt of court for filing objections to the corrupt taking and liquidation of my assets.

• Many federal civil rights and criminal violations arose from this retalia-tion. One form of criminal violation arose from retaliating against me for exercising due process remedies. This offense fell under Title 18 U.S.C. § 241.

• I suffered repeated retaliation from federal judges for attempting to report the criminal activities. These were criminal acts under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1512, and 1513.16

• By refusing to receive detailed charges of the criminal activities, or the evidence that I and my group of government whistleblowers sought to provide, these federal judges were guilty of other federal offenses under, for instance, Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1510, 2,17 3,18 4, and probably oth-ers, including the wire fraud statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341,19 and 1343.20 Crisis in Federal Courts Brought About by Judicial Civil Rights And Criminal Violations Related to Obstruction of Justice There now existed a crisis in federal courts. Federal judges had been aid-

ing and abetting, and encouraging, the violations of large numbers of federally protected rights, while engaging in obstruction of justice relating to matters inflicting great harm upon the internal security of the United States. By these acts, I had even more federal causes of actions that under the laws and Consti-tution of the United States guaranteed me access to the federal courts and re-quiring federal judges to perform a duty.

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 179Answer to Judicial Corruption: Destroy Constitutional Protections Federal judges responded to this crisis by enlarging upon the judicial cor-

ruption. Judge Milton Schwartz, and then Judge Marilyn Patel rendered unlaw-ful and unconstitutional orders voiding for me, for the remainder of my life, all rights to federal court access and voiding for me the rights and protections guaranteed under the laws and Constitution of the United States. These orders were offenses not only against me, but against the United States, its judicial process, our most basic rights, and simultaneously made the federal courts into a corrupt arm of government.

In addition, these orders and the retaliation described in this letter, consti-tuted a crime under Title 18 U.S.C. § 245.21 It is a crime to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person or class of person. I am a whistleblower, for want of a better word. These offenses against me arose from my attempts to report crimes implicating people in key government positions (and at one time, United Airlines management).

I’ll briefly highlight what happened next. (More details can be found in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies, and to a lesser extent in Drugging America. AUSA Dave Hall, in your office, has a copy of Defrauding America.) • Federal judges charged me with criminal contempt of court for having

exercised remedies under the Civil Rights Act and Declaratory Judgment Act. The violations of federally protected rights stated in those complaints were real, very serious, documented, and inflicting grave personal and fi-nancial harm upon me. There was nothing trivial about the issues raised in those complaints, for which federal judges had a mandatory duty to pro-vide relief.

• Federal judges charged me with criminal contempt of court for having exercised the mandatory duty to report federal crimes to a federal judge. The outrageous nature of this charge is that the federal judges charging me with a contempt of court for reporting crimes were themselves perpetrat-ing numerous criminal acts as stated in this letter, while corruptly misus-ing their judicial positions and the courts. Simultaneously, these judges were violating federally protected rights, while also aiding and abetting the violations of these rights that were occurring in a bizarre and reckless lawsuit filed in the California courts.

• From 1987 to 1995, federal judges had me constantly under charges of criminal contempt of court for having exercised federal responsibilities and federal civil liberties and civil rights.

• I was then denied a jury trial, and a kangaroo court trial conducted by fed-eral judges who were implicated in the crimes against me and crimes against the United States. I was then judged guilty and sentenced to six months in prison. The incarceration was done under the most difficult conditions that could be arranged. I was 67 years of age when that incarceration occurred, and had recently undergone open-heart surgery. You don’t suppose they wanted to kill me at that time?

• The combination of judicially inflicted civil rights violations, judicial in-validation of all protections in law, the conversion of the courts into a cor-rupt enterprise (under RICO?), forced me to file Chapter 11 to force a fed-eral judge to perform his or her duty in relation to the civil rights viola-tions occurring in the sham California lawsuit that was filed by a law firm reported to be a front for the Central Intelligence Agency. Judicial corrup-tion then escalated again:


• Orders were rendered in chambers taking my life’s assets (consisting of $10 million in real estate that funded my exposure activities), violating the constitutional and statutory requirement of a noticed hearing, for a hear-ing, for legally recognized cause. The orders falsely stated there had been a hearing on that date, when there was no hearing. That false stated by Judge Robert Jones violated Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001 relating to false state-ments on documents. My assets were then turned over to Trustee Charles Duck, who promptly worked with Oakland judge Edward Jellen to liqui-date the assets that had funded my exposure activities.

• Judge Jellen then rendered unlawful and unconstitutional orders barring me from filing any objections to the seizure and liquidation of my assets.

• When I filed objections as provided by federal law and constitutional rights, Judge Jellen charged me with criminal contempt of court, duplicat-ing what had been done by Judges Schwartz, Patel, Walker, and others.

• Jellen refused to provide money from my assets to obtain legal counsel to defend against the criminal contempt of court charge, refused to provide legal counsel, refused to allow me to testify at the kangaroo trial that he conducted, and then sentenced me to federal prison. That sentence was never carried out. He lacked the jurisdiction to sentence anyone to prison. Judge Patel and Walker then continued the criminal contempt of court

charges against me, which were suddenly dropped in 1995 without notification to me.

One of the last acts in the bankruptcy court proceeding occurred on March 25, 1999, as Judge Jellen dispensed the last remains of my $10 million estate to one of the law firms who played a part in the overall conspiracy and RICO predicate acts.

On March 13, 2000, I submitted for filing a lawsuit to the U.S. district court in Oakland, clearly stating documented facts raising federal issues under the Civil Rights Act, Bivens doctrine, civil RICO, and again demanded that the judge receive the evidence that I and a group of government whistleblowers wanted to provide to a federal judge under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Federal law required that I report criminal activities to a federal judge (or other federal officer). The laws and Constitution guaranteed to me the due process right to obtain relief from the violations of federally protected rights that were occur-ring.

Despite these federal provisions, the clerk of the court refused to file that lawsuit, despite statutory and constitutional requirements to do so. The reason? Judge Marilyn Patel had rendered an order in the late 1980s forever barring me access to the federal courts, and voiding for me all rights and protections under the laws and Constitution of the United States. We obviously have major na-tional issues here, involving the conversion of federal courts into corrupt acts of government, or some other unknown group; the undermining of the laws and Constitution of the United States; a vast conspiracy to violate civil rights of a whistleblower; a conspiracy to obstruct justice, and other federal offenses.

The evidence indicates that a powerful force high in government engi-neered the start of the sham lawsuit in the California courts and controlled the repeated patterns of judicial corruption that followed. I know of no other ex-planation for the record-setting number of violations that occurred during the 17 years of continuing violations of federal civil rights and criminal statutes by people in key government positions.

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 181One of the many ironies about all this is that the Department of Justice

holds a position of trust to prosecute anyone violating civil rights, and prose-cute anyone committing criminal violations, and instead, has joined the federal judges in perpetrating these offenses that have a grave impact upon the United States itself.

At this time Judge Marilyn Patel may be arranging to have your office charge me with criminal contempt of court. If you should do this, as former USA David Levi once did, you will become part of the conspiracy that is not only against me, but against the United States. I may be 77 years of age, but I’m not afraid to take on such crud criminalizing the government positions being held. Also, with my books receiving praise throughout the world, arrest-ing me may be the final straw to motivate enough people to do something about the worsening corruption in government.

I suggest you look at my web sites for further information on the under-mining of the government and the people of the United States by the criminal elements that I described within this letter (which will also be on the Internet shortly.)

There seems to be an uncanny determined ignorance about the law by those involved in the conspiracy, that I am including as endnotes certain of the many laws being violated in the continuing attacks upon me.


ENDNOTES 1. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an in-

formant (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threat-ens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to: (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to: (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (c) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hin-ders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from:

(1) attending or testifying in an official proceeding; (2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... (3) arresting or seeking the arrest of an-other person in connection with a Federal offense; or (4) causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation preceding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. (e) For the purposes of this section: (1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense; and (2) the testimony, or the record, document, or other object need not be admissible in evidence or free of a claim of privilege.

2. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 misprision of felony. “Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United


States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

3. Title 18 U.S.C. § 111. Impeding certain officers or employees. Who-ever ... intimidates, or interferes with any person ... while engaged in ... the performance of his official duties shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... [Certain industry (in this case United Airlines) and FAA officials interfered with FAA inspectors attempts to report major air safety violations and safety problems. These acts caused and made possible some of the nation’s worst air disasters. (List of such crashes elsewhere.)]

4. Title 18 U.S.C. § 35. Imparting or conveying false information. (b) Whoever willfully and maliciously, or with reckless disregard for the safety of human life, imparts or conveys or causes to be imparted or conveyed false information, knowing the information to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made or to be made, to do any act which would be a crime prohibited by this chapter or chapter 97 or chapter 11 of this tile--shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. [Air-craft and motor vehicles chapter.]

5. Title 18 U.S.C. § 34. Penalty when death results. Whoever is con-victed of any crime prohibited by this chapter, which has resulted in the death of any person, shall be subject also to the death penalty or to imprisonment for life.

6. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Statements or entries generally. Whoever in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined ... or imprisoned ...

7. Title 18 U.S.C. §1621. Perjury generally. Whoever (1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal ... willfully and contrary to such oath states ... any material matter which he does not believe to be true, he shall be fined ... or imprisoned .

8. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1622. Subornation of perjury. Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

9. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1505. Whoever corruptly ... influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due the proper ad-ministration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had be-fore any department or agency of the United States ... shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1505 applies to anyone who corruptly attempts by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States. They do not have to succeed to have committed a federal crime; the attempt or scheme (conspire) to do so is criminal.

10. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1510. Obstruction of criminal investigation. (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal stat-

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 183ute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) As used in this section, the term “criminal investigator” means any individual duly authorized by a department, agency, or armed force of the United States to conduct or engage in investigations of or prosecutions for violations of the criminal laws of the United States.

11. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an in-formant. (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threat-ens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to: (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to: (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (c) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hin-ders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from:

(1) Attending or testifying in an official proceeding; (2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... (3) arresting or seeking the arrest of an-other person in connection with a Federal offense; or (4) causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation preceding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. (e) For the purposes of this section: (1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense; and (2) the testimony, or the record, document, or other object need not be admissible in evidence or free of a claim of privilege.

12. Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides: Every person who, under color or any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any State of Territory, subjects ... any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceed-ing for redress. [Applies to anyone acting under color of state law who violates these rights.]

13. Title 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights. (1) Preventing officer from performing duty. If two or more persons ... conspire to prevent ... any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof; or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the dis-charge of his official duties.

(2) Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on ac-count of his having so attended or testified, or to influence the verdict, pre-sentment, or indictment of any grand or petit juror in any such court, or to in-jure such juror in his person or property on account of any verdict, present-


ment, or indictment lawfully assented to by him, or of his being or having been such juror; or if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the law, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;

(3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire ... for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws, or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; ... or to injure any citizen in person or property on ac-count of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages, occasioned by such injury or dep-rivation, against any one or more of the conspirators.

13. Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Action for neglect to prevent conspiracy. Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section [42 U.S.C. § 1985], are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commis-sion of the same, neglects or refuses to do so, if such wrongful act be commit-ted, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable dili-gence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action, and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefore, and may recover not exceeding five thousand dollars damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the de-ceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.

14. Title 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Creation of remedy. “In a case of actual con-troversy within its jurisdiction, any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such.

15. Title 28 U.S.C. § 2202. Further relief. “Further necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted, after reason-able notice and hearing, against any adverse party whose rights have been de-termined by such judgment.”

16. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 185another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for (1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a wit-ness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commis-sion or possible commission of a Federal offense ...

17. Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals. (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or pro-cures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

Note: The legislative intent to punish as a principal not only one who di-rectly commits an offense and one who “aids, abets, counsels, commands, in-duces or procures” another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. Case law decisions: Rothenburg v. United States, 1918, 38 S.Ct. 18, 245 U.S. 480, 62 L.Ed. 414, and United States v. Giles, 1937, 57 S.Ct. 340, 300 U.S. 41, 81 L.Ed. 493.

18. Title 18 U.S.C. § 3. Accessory after the fact. Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States had been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

19. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Frauds and swindles. Whoever, having de-vised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined ... or imprisoned .... or both.

20. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television. Who-ever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

21. Title 18 U.S.C. § 245. Federally protected activities. (b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or inter-fere with:

(1) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons [whistleblowers against corruption in government] from:

(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;

(C) applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States;

Title 18 U.S.C. § 246. Deprivation of relief benefits. Whoever directly or indirectly deprives, attempts to deprive, or threatens to deprive any person


of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of political affiliation [whistleblower] ... shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Conspiracy against [civil] rights. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights. (1) Preventing officer from performing duty. If two or more persons ... conspire to prevent ... any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof; or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the dis-charge of his official duties.

(2) Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on ac-count of his having so attended or testified, or to influence the verdict, pre-sentment, or indictment of any grand or petit juror in any such court, or to in-jure such juror in his person or property on account of any verdict, present-ment, or indictment lawfully assented to by him, or of his being or having been such juror; or if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the law, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;

(3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire, or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws, or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; ... or to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in further-ance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an ac-tion for the recovery of damages, occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators.

Title 18 U.S.C.§ 241 Conspiracy against rights. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State,

First Domestic Aviation Terrorist Attack 187Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or en-joyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law. Who-ever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, will-fully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or ..., shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;

No Response, and Worse Consequences Would Occur The pattern of non-response and cover-up followed that letter, ena-

bling the misconduct to continue, insuring that preventative measures for similar attacks would not be implemented. Every one of the federal criminal and civil rights statutes stated in that letter was violated during the various schemes to halt my attempts to expose criminal activities against the United States.

As I had warned for many years, cover-up of the misconduct would continue the practice, would continue the crashes—that repeatedly did occur. I made the same warnings about the cover-up of the real cause of Flight 800, and sure enough, as will be seen, even worst air disasters occurred. That scenario continues.

Multiple Areas Undergoing DOJ Cover-Ups At the same time FBI-DOJ personnel were debunking the explosive

residue evidence, Gregory Scarpa Jr. was going through a criminal trial, and providing testimony showing the involvement of FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio in murders and other crimes.

Previously Convicted Criminals Turned Loose Several previous criminal convictions had already been overturned

on the basis of rumors that Colombo Mafia capo Gregory Scarpa Sr. was criminally involved with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVec-chio, and that FBI agent was a co-conspirator with Scarpa Sr. If that information was now made known to jurors, other defendants would probably be acquitted, including that of Scarpa’s son, Gregory Scarpa Jr.

In addition, if Gregory Scarpa Jr’s information obtained from the al Qaeda terrorists was considered credible, his testimony would also be considered creditable about the murders and other crimes in which a key FBI Supervisory Agent was involved for many years, FBI-DOJ officials would be at risk and blame for not acting on information of planned terrorist attacks provided by Scarpa.

A decision was then made to discredit Gregory Scarpa Jr. This in-volved cooperation of FBI-DJ official and federal judges, a problem I


encountered repeatedly and documented in judicial records and de-scribe in my various books.

Multiple FBI People Involved in the Scheme In addition to James Kallstrom and Valerie Caproni, the chief of the

FBI’s Criminal Division in New York, there was DOJ prosecutor Pat-rick Fitzgerald, chief of the Organized Crime and Terrorism Unit in New York. Some years later, in 2006, Fitzgerald was selected by Attor-ney General Alberto Gonzales to “investigate” the outing of CIA covert agent Valerie Plame. Fitzgerald limited his investigation to Vice Presi-dent Dick Cheney’s assistant, Lewis Libby, charging Libby with leak-ing the CIA identity of the CIA operative and exposing her European contacts. Fitzgerald protected the role of Vice President Dick Cheney and the possible involvement of President George W. Bush.

Memorandum Discrediting Scarpa’s Information on Planned Terrorist Actions Prior to the downing of TWA Flight 800, Valerie Caproni issued a

memorandum discrediting the warnings that Gregory Scarpa Jr. had given. Now that the information al Qaeda operative Ramzi Yousef gave to Scarpa was deadly accurate, to protect herself, she played a key role in the spark-in-the-fuel-tank charade.

Cooperating in the DOJ scheme was U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein. He presided over Scarpa’s trial, and called his undercover work with the al Qaeda member, Ramzi Yousef, a hoax. Weinstein sen-tenced Scarpa to prison and refused to reduce his sentence, despite the assurances given to Scarpa by the FBI personnel who coordinated the important inside role played by Scarpa.

Evidence Contradicting the Hoax Scheme Evidence contradicting the hoax scheme included, for instance:

• Pictures of the actual notes passed from Yousef through Scarpa, which were photographed by a miniature camera that the FBI gave Scarpa for that purpose. Obviously, FBI personnel, at that time, didn’t consider Scarpa’s efforts a hoax; they continued the relation-ship with Scarpa for over a year.

• The dozens of FBI 302 reports describing the information that Scarpa obtained from Yousef.

• The FBI setting up the bogus ROMA Corporation and phone for Yousef to call his terrorist associates.

• FBI agents listening in on Yousef’s telephone calls using Scarpa’s fictitious ROMA Corporation.

• Kallstrom’s praising of the work Scarpa was doing, until it became known that Scarpa’s role had to be discredited.


• The testimony of many organized crime figures that knew of the corrupt relationship between Scarpa Sr. and DeVecchio.The actions by other veteran FBI agents who, in 1994, took the unprecedented actions of charging DeVecchio with corrupt relationship with Scarpa Sr. There were obvious evidence they found during their professional and official duties to prove DeVecchio’s conduct was corrupt and criminal.


CHAPTER SIX

Ripple Effects on 9/11

he misconduct in the government’s aviation safety offices, the misconduct in the CIA and FBI, and the endemic cover-ups, had blowback consequences many times, but on September 11,

2001, the consequences were far beyond any other easily preventable airline disaster. For years the consequences of deep-seated misconduct in the FAA have been preventable airline crashes. On this day the con-sequences would exceed in horror each of the prior aviation tragedies for which warnings had been given by key federal aviation safety in-spectors.

The worst terrorist attack upon America, and possibly anywhere in the world, occurred on that date. These recent events were made possi-ble by the culture of misconduct, corruption, and criminal activities that I detailed and documented in each of my books, in letters, and in court filings. This corrupt culture, and its cover-up, caused the conditions to exist that enabled hijackers to seize four airliners on that fateful day.

The death toll during that two-hour period was greater than that which occurred at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Those events were followed by an endless series of economic and personal events felt by people throughout the United States, and destroyed many of the benefits that they previously enjoyed.

The Success of the Four Groups Was Insured By Documented Corruption in Government Offices The September 11 events started with four groups of hijackers

boarding four different airliners at approximately the same time and then after the aircraft were airborne, forcing their way into the cockpit. Their plans to take over the aircraft were encouraged by the absence of security measures that had been made obvious by forty years of suc-cessful hijackings, some of which ended fatally.

T


United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767, left the gate at Boston’s Logan Airport for Los Angeles at 7:58 a.m. American Airlines Flight 11, also a Boeing 767, left Boston at 08:00 a.m., heading for Los Ange-les. Further south, American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, departed Washington’s Dulles Airport for Los Angeles at 8:21 a.m. And a fourth aircraft, United Airlines Flight 93, also a Boeing 757, departed Newark for San Francisco at 8:43 a.m. All four aircraft had nearly full fuel tanks.

During climb to cruising altitude, after the airliners had taken off for their west coast destinations, each of the four groups of hijackers sprang into action. Armed with knives and box cutters that they had on their person, or in carry-on baggage, or possibly placed on board the aircraft by ground service personnel, they attacked the cabin flight at-tendants to obtain the key to the cockpit door. (The FAA, in its distorted wisdom, allowed these items to be carried on board the aircraft, despite their lethal capabilities.)

They then forced their way into the cockpit where they are believed to have killed the pilots. The hijackers then took over control of the aircraft. Several of the hijackers had received sufficient pilot training in small aircraft in the United States. Several others also received training in airline-type simulators. This training was sufficient to fly airliners once they became airborne.

Flights Diverted from Their Westerly Direction The hijackers diverted American Airlines Flight 11 from its west-

erly heading and headed straight for New York City. The air traffic con-troller working that aircraft saw the aircraft change course and the transponder’s return disappear (due to the transponder being turned off in the aircraft). The controller’s calls went unanswered.

Approaching New York City, Flight 11 headed toward the north tower of the World Trade Center. At 8:46 a.m., the large jet, loaded with fuel, crashed into the tower at over 400 miles per hour. A giant fireball erupted as the fuel ignited, sending black smoke hundreds of feet into the air. Parts of the plane shot out the opposite side of the building, causing thousands of papers to rain down upon the financial district in lower New York City. Bodies and parts of bodies plummeted upon hor-rified spectators.

The heat inside the north tower was so intense that many men and women jumped to certain death rather than die the slow painful death of being cremated alive.

As television cameras focused on the burning north tower of the World Trade Center, United Airlines Flight 175 appeared. At 9:03 a.m., it was filmed crashing into the south tower of the World Trade Center.

Ripple Effects on 9/11 193

Again, the high-speed impact caused a massive fireball to erupt, fol-lowed by plumes of flame and black smoke.

The intense heat from the burning fuel caused the metal framework of the south tower to soften and lose strength, causing one of the floors to collapse onto the lower floor at 10 a.m. This increased weight upon the floor below caused that floor to collapse. This sequence continued until the entire 105 floors had collapsed into a massive heap. The same sequence happened shortly thereafter to the north tower, which col-lapsed in spectacular fashion at 10:29 a.m.

Never in the world’s history had such an event occurred, in addition to being filmed as the events occurred. The entire series of events, ex-cept for the first aircraft crashing into the north tower, were filmed and seen worldwide.

Over 2,000 people inside the building, and others on the ground were crushed to death by the collapse of the World Trade Center.

More Tragedies Unfolding The next catastrophic event occurred in the Washington area. Hi-

jackers flew American Airlines Flight 77 toward Washington, D.C., crashing it into the Pentagon at 9:38 a.m. This crash killed 64 people on Flight 77 and 125 in the Pentagon.

The last of the four hijacked planes was United Airlines Flight 93. Because of a delayed departure, the scenario on Flight 93 was different. After the hijackers took over the aircraft, passengers and flight atten-dants used the aircraft’s seat-back telephones and personal cell phones to advise people on the ground of the hijacking. They described the hijacking, that the hijackers had knives and box cutters, and that the hijackers had already killed a flight attendant. The callers on Flight 93 learned that two airliners had been crashed into the World Trade Center.

Facing a similar fate, several of the passengers decided to fight the hijackers, a decision relayed by cell phone from the aircraft. It is un-known just what happened next. But people on the ground in Pennsyl-vania saw United 93 flying erratically as it descended, and then going inverted and diving almost vertically into the ground at approximately 10:10 a.m. The aircraft almost totally disappeared below ground level, with the primary evidence of an aviation disaster being smoke pouring from the hole in the ground.

About half an hour before Flight 93 dug into the ground, and after two airliners crashed into the World Trade Center, the FAA issued or-ders barring all aircraft from taking off, and ordered those already in the air to immediately land.

Prior Major Airline Disaster in NYC with Butterfly-Effect Links to the Events of 9/11 The two jetliners that slammed into the World Trade Center in New


York City had been preceded by another jetliner crash into that city many years earlier, with similar underlying safety problems. That ear-lier crash of a United Airliners DC-8 was the world’s worst air disaster when it happened and it occurred on the program for which I had fed-eral air safety responsibilities. All three crashes were made possible by the deep-seated problems within the government’s aviation safety of-fices.

That earlier crash, occurring on December 16, 1960, was one of a series of air disasters that caused the federal government to give me the assignment to correct the problems. That was the assignment that pro-pelled me to engage in 40 years of activist activities seeking to report and bring about changes. The refusal of many people to respond to these exposures made possible the events of 9/11.

Promptly Identifying the Hijackers By checking passenger records and other reports, the names used

by the hijackers who boarded the hijacked planes were quickly deter-mined. Most of the hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia who had been recruited by the al Qaeda terrorist group whose main training base was in Afghanistan.

Immediate Post-September 11 Effects on U.S. Aviation The Bush administration ordered the immediate grounding of all

aircraft throughout the United States. Several days later, the airlines were cleared to resume flying. General aviation aircraft were grounded for an extended period of time. The ban against flying was continued in effect much longer for crop dusters, the thinking being that terrorists might use these aircraft to spread biological weapons.

The restrictions on general aviation aircraft were lifted piece-meal. When the grounding restrictions were removed from most of the gen-eral aviation fleet, government officials still grounded most general aviation aircraft from landing or taking off from many airports located within 25 miles of a major city, thinking that this would prevent terror-ists from crashing an airplane into a congested destination. This grounding of hundreds of aircraft at airports within the 25-mile radius made no sense since a terrorist could simply take off from an airport outside the 25-mile limit and fly into the restricted area before anyone could stop the aircraft.

Another restriction grounded all small aircraft at airports within ten miles of a nuclear facility. Helicopter operations were grounded, which prevented news organizations from reporting live-time news coverage. Another restriction was that student pilots could fly within the ex-panded Class B airspace but not licensed pilots or flight instructors.

These senseless restrictions showed the level of intelligence that


would “protect” America from terrorists that had a somewhat higher level of intelligence. The only effect of the orders was to bar law-abiding pilots from flying and the orders inflicted severe economic damage upon aviation operators.

Greater Danger from Terrorist Attacks Ignored Among the far easier high-profile target for a terrorist, rather than

using a small general aviation aircraft, would be driving a car or truck loaded with explosives into the Holland or Lincoln tunnels connecting New York City to New Jersey, or onto bridges such as the George Washington or Golden Gate bridges.

If grounding the nation’s general aviation fleet made sense, the same thing should have been done to halt all movement of cars or trucks. That of course would be impractical and ridiculous, and in a way, the grounding of all general aviation was equally so.

Bizarre Way of Encouraging the Public to Fly During a speech shortly after the September 11 attack, President

George Bush encouraged the public to go about their normal activities, including flying. During this speech he referred to several changes he was authorizing. One such change was Bush’s authorization for mili-tary planes to shoot down airliners that would kill as many as 300 to 400 men, women, and children if someone on the ground thought the aircraft was hijacked and thought it might crash into a major building.

A hijacked aircraft does not mean that the hijackers intended to, or would succeed, in flying the aircraft into a high-rise building killing. And if a hijacking was actually in progress, there was always the possi-bility that people on board the aircraft would regain control of the air-craft.

But shooting down the aircraft would positively kill hundreds. In-credibly, not a single protest was heard from the lapdog press, the sud-den lapdog members of Congress, or even the public.

Another authorization to kill people in aircraft was to authorize the military to shoot down general aviation aircraft if the aircraft flew into any one of the hundreds of restricted airspaces throughout the United States, which frequently change and are unknown to many pilots.

One near shoot down occurred when a state government’s aircraft was flying into Washington National Airport (which had been cleared by the FAA, but not known to the Transportation Security Agency) was not aware of the clearance and government buildings. In typical infan-tile reaction, government buildings in Washington were evacuated, with people running out in fear of their lives.

Funding the “Impossible” Bush stated he was ordering the funding of a system to convert the

thousands of U.S. airliners so that by signal from the ground the aircraft


controls would become totally ineffective, preventing the hijackers—or the pilots—from flying the aircraft into buildings. If some bureaucrat on the ground felt that the aircraft had been hijacked and would possi-bly be used as a flying bomb or missile, the pilot controls would be dis-abled and someone on the ground, hundreds or thousands of miles away, would control the aircraft.

The plan to reengineer airliners was mentally bankrupt and totally impractical. The massive and complex reengineering of these aircraft would be impractical, the cost prohibitive, and the massive engineering and conversion could not be accomplished before most of the aircraft were replaced with newer generation aircraft Further, pilots would not want to lose control of the aircraft. Nor would safety considerations permit such a ridiculous scheme. That plan gave an insight into the president’s intelligence.

Victim Compensation Fund Following the September 11 attacks, Congress passed legislation

known as the Victim Compensation Fund which gave relatives of the victims the choice of whether to accept compensation that was likely to average out as nearly two million dollars, or to take their chances on suing. If they sued, they lost their right to compensation under the fund.

Some refused to accept the government compensation, claiming that this route prevented discovery which could expose those people who were primarily the blame for the conditions that allowed hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11. Whether this reason was true or not, the same people saying they wanted to learn the truth made no effort to look into my charges of corruption within the FAA as being primarily responsible for the conditions that encouraged and insured the success of the hijackers.

Suing the Wrong People Lawyers for some 600 family members of September 11 victims

filed a lawsuit against Saudi officials, banks and charities, and the gov-ernment of Sudan, claiming that they financed Osama bin Laden’s net-work and the attacks on New York and Washington. The lawsuit sought as much as $1 trillion in damages, and charged the defendants with racketeering, wrongful death, negligence and conspiracy. The plaintiffs hoped to recover, in the event of a judgment, from Saudi assets in the U.S.

Over 80 defendants were named in the lawsuit, including seven banks, eight Islamic foundations and three Saudi princes. The 15-count lawsuit, modeled after an action filed against Libya to recover for the Pan Am flight 103 disaster, sought to cripple banks, charities and some members of the Saudi royal family as a deterrent to terrorist financing


schemes. Several of the Saudi banks and Islamic charities named in the lawsuit vehemently denied any role in funding terrorism and called the case an attempt to extort Saudi wealth abroad.

Saudi Arabia was one of America’s most important allies in the Middle East, and further alienating them in this manner caused even more hatred toward the United States.

Praising the Public and Handing Out Hero Labels Damage control by U.S. leaders commenced by shifting the pub-

lic’s attention from those whose misconduct created the conditions in-suring the success of the 9/11 hijackers. Bush quickly praised the American people, who knew virtually nothing about the behind-the-scene misconduct of government officials that played major roles in the successful hijackings. Bush and other members of his administration praised those government personnel who did what they were paid to do, and applied the hero label to many people who didn’t meet the defini-tion of the word. These feel-good tactics worked, and virtually no one made reference to how such a great tragedy could occur when the pre-ventative remedies were so obvious.

Keeping the FAA Administrator Out of Sight After September 11, the FAA Administrator, Jane Garvey, was no-

where to be seen. Otherwise, people would be reminded that this sweet-looking politically correct government official didn’t have the back-ground in aviation needed for that position. If a competent FAA admin-istrator had been in place before September 11, and the corrupt culture did not exist throughout the operational divisions of the FAA, preventa-tive measures would probably have been taken.

Preventing Hijackings Was Simple, Inexpensive, and Urgent Hijackings, including fatal hijackings, occurred throughout the ex-

istence of the FAA, which came into being in 1958. Anyone with suffi-cient aviation expertise with a responsibility to act on safety problems would have known the correction actions needed. I recognized the problem and the solution while an airline pilot, and addressed the prob-lem while I was a federal air safety inspector. I reported that the imme-diate corrective actions were to order the removal of cockpit door keys from the cabin flight attendant, keep the cockpit door locked during flight, stronger cockpit doors, elimination of the massive carry-on lug-gage, and barring passengers from carrying anything on board the air-craft that could be used as a weapon.

The removal of cockpit door keys from the flight attendants, which could have been put in place within 24 hours, by itself would have probably prevented the hijackers from seizing control of the four airlin-ers on 9/11. Even if the FAA was 50 years late in these preventative measures, the numerous reports of planned airliner hijackings immedi-


ately preceding 9/11 could have shown a competent FAA administrator the need for these preventative measures.

Evidence that Cockpit Doors Were Opened With Keys There was no indication that the hijackers had to break down any of

the cockpit doors, strongly indicating that they used the cockpit door keys taken from the flight attendants. If any of the hijackers had tried to break down the cockpit doors, an alert pilot could easily put the aircraft in an unusual attitude to hinder such activities, time enough to permit passengers to become involved in halting cockpit intrusion.

Why These and Other Required And Authorized Safety Measures Were Not Taken For years the FAA administrator’s position has been a political po-

sition used for vote-generating power through placement of “politically correct” personnel. Many FAA and NTSB personnel have complained to me over the years of the adverse effects of management personnel in key safety positions who lacked the experience and competency to properly perform their jobs. The lack of these requisites on the part of FAA administrators (except the first few that held that position) caused politicians, members of Congress or the office of the president, to order safety actions to be taken. For instance, during the Clinton administra-tion, Vice President Al Gore was head of a group studying and recom-mending aviation safety steps to be taken.

Destruction of Safety Reports and Fatal Air Disasters Official reports of major air safety problems and air safety viola-

tions, prepared by federal air safety inspectors, were frequently de-stroyed by FAA management. Federal aviation safety inspectors were threatened if they made such reports or took corrective actions at politi-cally powerful airlines. Inspectors were threatened with poor fitness reports, or transfer, if they didn’t “get on the team” and act to maintain office tranquility by not reporting safety problems and safety viola-tions. This type of misconduct is never reported as contributing to a particular aircraft accident and the associated deaths. I describe these problems in more detail in my Unfriendly Skies.

With the culture and rampant corruption inside the FAA, many safety problems that could have prevented dozens of aviation disasters were not addressed. The federal government’s air safety responsibilities were prevented from being carried out by this culture. The same culture is found in many other government offices.

Greater Aviation Sophistication Required As the overseas policies and activities of U.S. politicians increas-

ingly outrage millions of people throughout the world, motivating peo-ple throughout the world to attack anything involving the United States


and its people, aircraft security measures must be made more sophisti-cated than was necessary earlier.

Threats to Aviation From Other Security Shortcomings For a period of time, luck, or whatever, existed to prevent major

terrorist acts against U.S. airliners. There were threats to aircraft other than hijackings, and these included explosive devices, surface-to-air missiles, and sabotage. Bombs can be easily placed on aircraft. They can be carried on board in the carry-on luggage, placed in checked bag-gage, or hidden anywhere on the aircraft by baggage loaders, service personnel, maintenance personnel.

Despite the threat, cargo was still allowed on board passenger air-craft without being checked for explosives. But even if they were checked, there is no 100 percent effective machine for detecting explo-sives. Further, explosives can be packed in such a way that they cannot be detected by the vapor detection machines.

Prior Knowledge of Most Aviation Safety Dangers In almost every airline crash over the years, airline and FAA per-

sonnel knew prior to the crash of the safety problems and the means to prevent the crash. So it was with the simple means to prevent hijack-ings. An example of how the airline knew of one problem associated with hijackings was shown in a letter sent to me (August 22, 2002) by a former DC-8 flight instructor for United Airlines, Richard Pitt. He wrote:

During training the company told us about the cockpit door and how easy it was to break it down. The airlines knew about this back in 1977 and 1978, I know for a fact. Why? Because I remember the guy making a joke about what if some big drunk ever broke the door down and got into the cockpit. If the world knew then how easy it was to get into an airliner’s cockpit, we’d been in a lot more problems than we’d know what to do. So, to sum it up, Rodney, we were aware of weak doors years ago.

In referring to how pilots should communicate with ground person-

nel during hijackings, Pitt wrote that they were told to report “low pres-sure refueling” if the hijackers hadn’t harmed anyone. If it appeared that they did intend harm, they were to report the need for “high pres-sure refueling.”

Former Cabin-Disturbance Practice Had Dangers A standard practice prior to September 11 when a cabin disturbance

existed was for one of the pilots to go into the cabin to address a physi-cal disturbance. The practice of having one of the pilots confront one or more passengers causing a disturbance was fraught with danger of the pilot being physically disabled. This should never have been allowed


by the FAA, or at the very least, greatly discouraged. The proper way to handle this problem was to have the cabin crew

contain at least one male flight attendant. It would be his responsibility, and not the pilots, to handle unruly passengers. Having only female cabin attendants, who don’t have the strength of most males, is not an adequate defense against the increasing disturbances in the cabin with the advent airline travel by the masses.

Sky Marshals, Mixed Bag of Protection The same politicians that decided pilots didn’t know how to protect

the aircraft and rejected their demand for guns in the cockpit, heartily approved armed sky marshals on aircraft that could be expected to en-gage in a gunfight in the cabin. Sky marshals are a protection, but can be easily defeated by two or more hijackers located at different cabin locations.

Amateurish Level of Safety Airport Security Conduct The amateurish nature of airport security surfaced after September

11 as the politicians continued to control aviation security. Little old ladies, children, cripples, who were hardly any risk, were singled out for extensive inspections, which in some cases included partial disrob-ing, while young males more likely to engage in terrorist acts were be-ing ignored.

Putting the Same People in Charge Who made 9/11 Possible President Bush put Norman Mineta as head of the United States

Department of Transportation, the same person who, while a congress-man from California and on aviation committees, repeatedly covered up for the documented corruption in the FAA that I frequently brought to his attention.

If he had acted then, many aviation tragedies could have been avoided, including the 3,000 deaths on September 11. U.S. Attorney Robert Mueller, who was selected to head the FBI, had received letters from me while he was in San Francisco, describing the corruption in the FAA and the intelligence agencies that I and a group of other gov-ernment agents had discovered. He never responded.

Paranoia and Hysteria Concerning Airport Security After 9/11, federal directives affecting aviation safety were often

amateurish with a combination of paranoia and hysteria. Entire airport terminals were often evacuated and aircraft ordered to return simply because a relatively minor oversight occurred. In light of the many far more serious security shortcomings, this reaction to a relatively minor oversight was ludicrous. There must be a level of common sense used, but this requires aviation expertise, and the politicians responsible for September 11 and responsible for post-September 11 aviation safety


don’t have the expertise upon which common sense is based. Obvious security problems went unattended. For instance, cockpit

doors were left open when passengers were boarding or deplaning the aircraft, providing a window of opportunity for terrorists to take over the aircraft with all types of subsequent wild cards that could subse-quently follow.

Because the cockpit doors are occasionally opened during flight, sometimes for the pilots to use the toilets, one or more dedicated hi-jackers could still rush the open door and get into the cockpit, using a previously concealed plastic or cylindrical weapon firing bullets, or knives. To address this problem, additional protections are needed.

Short Selling of United and America Airlines Stock Suggesting Prior Knowledge of 9/11 Hijackings A few days prior to the hijackings of American Airlines and United

Airlines aircraft unprecedented “short-selling” of stocks in these two companies occurred. Millions of dollars of profit was made by the peo-ple making the transactions. No other stock had such short-selling ac-tivity during this same period. It was as if certain people who profited by the short selling knew that United Airlines and American Airlines would suffer catastrophic losses within a few days and that their stock would plunge in value.

Short Selling, Betting That Stock Would Go Down Short selling works by a person entering an agreement to sell a cer-

tain stock at some future date at the current market price, and the other party agrees to buy it at that price. The seller pays a price to the other party for this option. The seller is betting on the price of the stock going down, enabling him to buy the stock at the lower price and then imme-diately sell it at the higher agreed-upon price to the buyer. The buyer, who receives a price for the contract, bets on the stock not going down in price.

The profit for the seller is the difference between what the market price was at the time the contract was completed and the market price at the performance date, minus the amount that had to be paid by the person initiating the short selling.

If the person who initiates the short selling knew that United Air-lines and American Airlines aircraft would be destroyed by hijackers, which would most likely cause the stock price to go down, the person doing the short selling could purchase a short selling contract and profit when the market price for the stock goes down. The opposite to a put-option, where the initiator bets on the stocks going down in price, is a call-option, where the initiator bets on the stock going up in price.

Numerous articles were written about this relationship. One was by the International Policy Institute for Counter Terrorism (September 21,


2001) titled, “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” According to a report in FTW Publications by Mike Ruppert:

Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Penta-gon.

In the case of at least one of these trades—which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed—the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Cen-tral Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. Krongard joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year.

It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades, in real time, as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests. A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counter Terrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades con-nected to the September 11 attacks.

That article gave examples, such as in the case of Morgan Stanley

Dean Witter & Co., where an average of 27 put options occurred. How-ever, in the three trading days before the September 11 events, there were 2,157. At Merrill Lynch & Co, which experienced an average of 252 contracts, the four trading days before 9/11 had 12,215 such op-tions.

The Chicago Board Options Exchange saw similar disproportionate increases, with 4,744 put options on United Airlines for September 6 and 7 and for American Airlines, there were 4,516 put options placed on September 10. There was no news to support such unprecedented increases. There were no other airlines experiencing these stock con-tracts in which people were betting that the shares of these two airlines would take a dramatic drop.

During this same period, there were virtually no call options, which are executed by people betting that the price of the stock will go up.

An article in the New York Times (May 25, 2002) was titled, “Stock Adviser Knew About 9/11 Attacks, U.S. Suggests,” and stated:


A San Diego stock adviser who is accused of bribing an F.B.I. agent to give him confidential government information may have had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal prosecutor said yesterday.

In court hearing in San Diego, Kenneth Breen, an assistant United States attorney, said the adviser, Amr Ibrahim Elgindy, tried to sell $300,000 in stock on the afternoon of Sept. 10 and told his broker that the stock market would soon plunge. Mr. Elgindy and four other people, including one current and one former F.B.I. agent, were charged Wednesday with using confidential govern-ment information to manipulate stock prices and extort money from companies.

Mr. Elgindy and his partner, Derrick W. Cleveland, sold short the shares of companies that they learned were under investigation, according to the indictment. (Short sellers borrow shares and sell them, hoping to buy them back later at a lower price and pocket the difference.) Then Mr. Elgindy publicized the negative information on two Web sites he ran, hoping that the companies’ stock would fall, prosecutors say. A Wall Street Journal article (August 22, 2001) addressed the rela-

tionship between short sellers and Justice Department prosecutors: The case illuminates the dark side of the relationship between law enforcers and short sellers, investors who trade on intimations of corporate trouble. Short sellers borrow shares from a broker and immediately sell them in hopes the price will fall. If there is a drop, the short sellers can replace the shares with cheaper ones and keep the difference. Standard Pattern of Disinformation; the Public Bought It! The Bush White House stated that nothing could have been done

after being informed that terrorists planned to seize airliners. Once that was known, the date and place was not necessary for the FAA to issue orders that could have been implemented within 24 hours and which would surely have prevented the hijackers from seizing any of the four airliners. The two preventative measures were keeping keys to the flight station out of the cabin crew’s possession, and keeping the cock-pit door locked.

Like a Tree Growing From an Acorn The public didn’t recognize that the internal FAA problems—and

their cover-ups—would cause and enable such catastrophic conse-quences to occur. Years of air disasters could have been prevented if people in and out of government had reacted to those inspectors who


reported these serious problems. By failing to show even the most basic signs of courage and responsibility, the United States entered a phase after 9/11 that would have catastrophic consequences. Like a huge tree growing from an acorn, massive national tragedies arose from the cor-ruption that I and other insiders reported.

Start of the Usual Cover-Ups: Intelligence Failure Gimmick Because there was so much misconduct associated with the suc-

cessful 9/11 hijackings, it was necessary for massive disinformation and cover-ups to occur. The hijackings of four airliners were obvious aviation safety matters for which people in the government’s aviation safety offices had the authority and responsibility to order the known preventative measures.

Obviously, why these known preventative measures were not taken should have been the primary focus of attention. Instead, that area was completely ignored—and very probably, deliberately. The decision was made to limit the damage control “investigation” into alleged intelli-gence failure and failures to act on known intelligence. And even here, there was cover-up, as the corruption within the CIA and FBI which surely affected their performance was ignored. This area of corruption was also included in the information that I and other government agents had discovered, and which we tried to report to members of Congress and to federal judges under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.

Another Cover-Up Tactic: Unpatriotic to Question America’s Leaders Another tactic used to prevent any meaningful investigation into

the primary areas of blame for 9/11 was to call anyone calling for an investigation to be unpatriotic on the basis that the “nation was at war.”

Standard Corrective Action: Create Another Department The standard corrective action, or public relation action, following

exposure of misconduct in a government office, was to create another department, or rename the existing department. This was done with the Federal Aviation Agency after I exposed the corruption related to a se-ries of fatal airline crashes. Congress created the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration: the same people and the same culture carried over.

Office of Homeland Security in White House Shortly after September 11, President Bush established the Office

Of Homeland Security and appointed as its director former Pennsyl-vania governor Tom Ridge. One of its goals was to make available to all police and intelligence agencies the information gathered by every other agency. This would allow agents from any of the dozens of gov-ernment entities to access information on ongoing investigations in any


of the other government entities. Department of Homeland Security In early 2002, President Bush advocated another bureaucracy to

provide better defenses against terrorist acts. He submitted to Congress (June 18, 2002) draft legislation to bring all of the many government agencies into the new department that would be called the Department of Homeland Security, which was then passed into legislation.

Naïve Plan for Spreading Confidential Information President Bush’s plans for sharing information between agencies,

available to tens of thousands of government agents, theoretically sounded plausible, but it had serious problems. Crime groups and ter-rorists have gained access to these computer systems, either directly or through any one of the thousands of government agents who have ac-cess to them. These are described in detail in Defrauding America and Drugging America.

9/11, ripple effects, with the deep-seated culture continuing the series of fraud-related airline disasters.


Still Other Problems with 9/11 Ripple Effects There was another aspect of FBI-DOJ conduct that enabled several

terrorist acts against the United States to occur. In the book, Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, and the Mafia, I go into great detail about this relation-ship. Basically, here are the highlights of what I wrote and documented.

Ramzi Yousef, who masterminded the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, was incarcerated in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in Manhattan while waiting trial. In an adjoining cell was Co-lombo Mafia member Gregory Scarpa, Jr. Scarpa befriended Yousef and convinced Yousef that he and his Mafia associates were also inter-ested in attacking U.S. interests. Based upon this alleged common goal, Yousef told Scarpa about planned bombings in Africa, that did occur; planned terrorist attack upon a U.S. airliner, which was followed shortly thereafter by the downing of TWA Flight 800; and the planned hijackings of U.S. airliners, that also occurred.

Scarpa, working secretly with the FBI, photographed notes that Yousef passed from his cell, to Scarpa in an adjoining cell, and then to another al Qaeda terrorist, Abdul Hakim Murad, who occupied the cell on the opposite side of the one occupied by Scarpa. FBI agents, who recognized the importance of what Scarpa was obtaining from Yousef, provided Scarpa with a camera to photograph the notes being passed between the two al Qaeda operatives.

Scarpa convinced Yousef that he had a company in New York that Yousef could use to place phone calls to other al Qaeda operatives, some locally and some in the Middle East. That fictitious corporation, called Roma, was staffed with FBI agents, who then relayed and moni-tored the phone calls.

Numerous FBI 302 forms, based upon the information Scarpa pro-vided, are shown in my other book, showing the high value that FBI agents gave to the unprecedented information Scarpa obtained as a mole inside that al Qaeda group. But FBI-DOJ officials did not act on the information of the planned terrorist attacks.

Sacrificing National Security to Protect FBI Corruption There was a reason why FBI-DOJ officials did not act upon the in-

formation given to Scarpa by this key al Qaeda terrorist. Scarpa’s fa-ther, Gregory Scarpa Sr., had been secretly working with FBI Supervi-sory Agent Lindley DeVecchio for years in various criminal activities. DeVecchio had been giving Scarpa Sr. the names of government infor-mants, who were then killed. And Scarpa Jr. knew about this relation-ship. Scarpa Jr. had to be discredited so as to protect those in the FBI-DOJ that were complicit in the secret relationship between the FBI-DOJ and the Colombo Mafia capo.

Ripple Effects on 9/11 207“No Brainer” Decision: Discredit Scarpa, Ignore Terrorist Warnings, and Allow the Terrorist Acts to Occur Difficult choices faced Department of Justice personnel in acting

on the planned terrorist attacks that Gregory Scarpa Jr. obtained from al Qaeda operative Ramzi Yousef. If FBI-DOJ officials acted upon the information, and gave Scarpa credit for obtaining it from infiltrating the ala Qaeda group, there would be serious consequences.

For instance, (a) numerous prior criminal convictions would be overturned, some of which had already occurred, based upon rumors of the DeVecchio-Scarpa Sr. relationship; (b) impending criminal trials would be undermined; (c) the status and compensation of DOJ prosecu-tors that depend on convictions would suffer; (d) the corrupt culture in the FBI and other DOJ offices would be exposed to the public; and (e) testimony by Scarpa Jr. would cause state prosecutors to charge DeVec-chio with multiple murders.

Charging a key FBI supervisory agent with murders would impli-cate higher FBI-DOJ officials that had known about the crimes. The decision to discredit Scarpa Jr. was therefore a “no brainer.” The deadly consequences that followed that decision was not much different from numerous instances that I have described in Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries, and several of my other books.

The decision involved high officials in Washington. Among them was FBI agent James Kallstrom, the key FBI agent involved in cover-ing up for the terrorist attack that downed TWA Flight 800; and Valerie Caproni, an assistant U.S. attorney, who was later elevated to a higher position in Washington.

Involvement of State and Federal Judges Judges also acted to carry out the deception. They rendered deci-

sions holding that Scarpa’s information, obtained as a mole in the al Qaeda cell, was a hoax. They all knew a price would be paid for their corrupt conduct. But this was not unusual; I write about the complicity of state and federal judges covering up for high-level corruption that was followed by a series of airline disasters and other tragedies, in my book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries. As usual, the public re-mained in the dark, and in some cases, in denial.

Judges Threatening Other Witnesses In addition, cooperating federal judges threatened other witnesses

with criminal prosecution if they testified about the criminal miscon-duct in the FBI-DOJ offices. Two examples: in the 1990s, Linda Schiro, the common law wife of Gregory Scarpa Sr., sought to testify in a trial about her son. Her testimony would expose the murderous conduct of FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio. To prevent that, FBI-DOJ


personnel threatened Schiro with prosecution for crimes if she testified. The New York trial judge was Reena Raggi.

Another example. Gregory Scarpa Jr.’s mother, Connie Scarpa, also backed down from testifying when she was warned that she would be charged with criminal prosecution if she were to testify.

In this way, the murderous actions of DeVecchio went unpunished and the information on the planned terrorist attacks was covered up. The ripple effects from discrediting Scarpa Jr. and refusing to act on the planned terrorist acts that Scarpa learned from Ramzi Yousef, did oc-cur,.

In the 1980s, U.S. Attorney David Levi and several judges at Sac-ramento, California charged me with criminal contempt of court for seeking to report the criminal activities in the FAA, the FBI, and the CIA, which I and several other former government agents discovered during our official duties. Details are found in several of my books, including Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries; and Defrauding America.

Extending Cover-Up to 9/11 Commission Despite the blocks by President George W. Bush, and the foot-

dragging by members of Congress, public pressure, especially from the many next of kin, the 9/11 Commission was created to investigate who was to blame for the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to so easily hijack four airliners. As in the past, the hearing group was composed of people amenable to cover-ups.

Canada, Watch Out, You May be Next! With so many al Qaeda terrorists being identified as Canadian citi-

zens it is a wonder White House officials hadn’t put Canada on a list of countries harboring terrorists! An article in Newsweek (August 9, 2004) described how the Bush White House considered attacking South America immediately after the 9/11 hijackings. The article stated:

Fighting Terror by Attacking … South America? Days after 9/11, a senior Pentagon official lamented the lack of

good targets in Afghanistan and proposed instead U.S. military at-tacks in South America or Southeast Asia as “a surprise to the ter-rorists,” according to a footnote in the recent 9/11 commission re-port. The unsigned top-secret memo, which the panel’s report said appears to have been written by Defense Under Secretary Douglas Feith, is one of several Pentagon documents uncovered by the commission which advance unorthodox ideas for the war on terror. The memo suggested “hitting targets outside the Middle East in the initial offensive” or a “non Al Qaeda target like Iraq,” the panel’s report states. U.S. attacks in Latin America and Southeast Asia


were portrayed as a way to catch the terrorists off guard when they were expecting an assault on Afghanistan.

The memo’s content, Newsweek has learned, was in part the product of ideas from a two-man secret Pentagon intelligence unit appointed by Feith after 9/11: veteran defense analyst Michael Maloof and Mideast expert David Wurmser, now a top foreign-policy aide to Dick Cheney. Maloof and Wurmser saw links be-tween international terror groups that the CIA and other intelli-gence agencies dismissed. They argued that an attack on terrorists in South America—for example, a remote region on the border of Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil where intelligence reports said Ira-nian-backed Hizbullah had a presence—would have ripple effects on other terrorist operations. The proposals were floated to top for-eign-policy advisers.

One proposal got greater traction. The 9/11 commission says the idea of attacking Iraq also was pushed in a Sept. 17 memo by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz argued that the odds were “far more” than one in 10 that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks, citing in part theories by controversial academic Laurie Mylroie that Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was an Iraqi intelligence agent. (The commission’s report found “no credible evidence” that Iraq was behind the 1993 attack—and no Iraqi involvement in 9/11. A Wolfowitz aide said the memo “did not talk about theories, but facts.”) Still, critics say, the ideas put forward by Wolfowitz, Feith and others in the Pentagon set the stage for the war in Iraq. Prior Knowledge of 9/11 Hijackings by Israel? An article appeared in the Internet site, www.MiddleEast.org (Sep-

tember 10, 2004), referring to a four-part series Fox News broadcast describing spying operations by Israel on the United States, and infor-mation indicating that Israel had advance notice of the 9/11 attacks. The article on the Middle East.org website and the transcript of the broadcasts starting on November 16, 2003, follows. The article on the website stated:

The four-part series created quite a stir at first in Washington but then the story was spiked and in fact ‘disappeared’ from the FOX News website, not to be mentioned again. Suspicions at the time were that the Israelis, using their extensive list of allies, lobby-ists, and major money and media agents-of-influence, had pulled out all stops and gotten the story quickly stopped in its tracks.

Now that there are more media groups involved, that FBI in-vestigations have already been publicly exposed, that the American


Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) itself is involved, and that the Jewish neocons are so fingered for having instigated the Iraqi War and the false ‘intelligence’ that led to it, the situation is much more complicated in Washington.

But AIPAC and Israel’s many official and unofficial lobbyists are now mounting a major campaign to bring the FBI investigation to an end with only minor charges involving ‘mishandling’ of clas-sified documents. The pressures on everyone in Washington are no doubt intense; especially in this election year. And so what hap-pened in November 2002 should be especially instructive; and in view of the most recent charges and investigations should be resur-rected:

Fox News Series on Israeli Spying In America Fox News Special Report - Part One BRIT HUME, HOST: It has been more than 16 years since a

civilian working for the Navy was charged with passing secrets to Israel. Jonathan Pollard pled guilty to conspiracy to commit espio-nage and is serving a life sentence. At first, Israeli leaders claimed Pollard was part of a rogue operation, but later took responsibility for his work. Now Fox News has learned some U.S. investigators believe that there are Israelis again very much engaged in spying in and on the U.S., who may have known things they didn’t tell us be-fore Sept. 11. Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron has details in the first of a four-part series.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CARL CAMERON, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Since

Sept. 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, ei-ther under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveil-lance activities against and in the United States.

There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9/11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are “tie-ins.” But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, “evi-dence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.”

Fox News has learned that one group of Israelis, spotted in North Carolina recently, is suspected of keeping an apartment in California to spy on a group of Arabs who the United States is also


investigating for links to terrorism. Numerous classified documents obtained by Fox News indicate that even prior to Sept. 11, as many as 140 other Israelis had been detained or arrested in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.

Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a working group that’s been compiling evidence since the mid ‘90s. These documents detail hundreds of incidents in cities and towns across the country that investigators say, “May well be an organ-ized intelligence gathering activity.”

The first part of the investigation focuses on Israelis who say they are art students from the University of Jerusalem and Bazala Academy. They repeatedly made contact with U.S. government personnel, the report says, by saying they wanted to sell cheap art or handiwork.

Documents say they, “targeted and penetrated military bases.” The DEA, FBI and dozens of government facilities, and even secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelli-gence personnel. The majority of those questioned, “stated they served in military intelligence, electronic surveillance intercept and or explosive ordinance units.”

Another part of the investigation has resulted in the detention and arrests of dozens of Israelis at American mall kiosks, where they’ve been selling toys called Puzzle Car and Zoom Copter. In-vestigators suspect a front.

Shortly after the New York Times and Washington Post re-ported the Israeli detentions last months, the carts began vanishing. Zoom Copter’s Web page says, “We are aware of the situation caused by thousands of mall carts being closed at the last minute. This in no way reflects the quality of the toy or its salability. The problem lies in the operators’ business policies.”

Why would Israelis spy in and on the U.S.? A general account-ing office investigation referred to Israel as country A and said, “According to a U.S. intelligence agency, the government of coun-try A conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the U.S. of any U.S. ally.”

A defense intelligence report said Israel has a voracious appe-tite for information and said, “The Israelis are motivated by strong survival instincts which dictate every possible facet of their politi-cal and economical policies. It aggressively collects military and industrial technology and the U.S. is a high priority target.”

The document concludes: “Israel possesses the resources and technical capability to achieve its collection objectives.”


(END VIDEO CLIP) A spokesman for the Israeli embassy here in Washington issued

a denial saying that any suggestion that Israelis are spying in or on the U.S. is “simply not true.” There are other things to consider. And in the days ahead, we’ll take a look at the U.S. phone system and law enforcement’s methods for wiretaps. And an investigation that both have been compromised by our friends overseas.

HUME: Carl, what about this question of advanced knowledge of what was going to happen on 9/11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known something?

CAMERON: It’s very explosive information, obviously, and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected - none of it necessarily conclusive. It’s more when they put it all to-gether. A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have known? Almost a direct quote.

HUME: Going into the fact that they were spying on some Ar-abs, right?

CAMERON: Correct. HUME: All right, Carl, thanks very much. Part 2 BRIT HUME, HOST: Last time we reported on the approxi-

mately 60 Israelis who had been detained in connection with the Sept. 11 terrorism investigation. Carl Cameron reported that U.S. investigators suspect that some of these Israelis were spying on Ar-abs in this country, and may have turned up information on the planned terrorist attacks back in September that was not passed on.

Tonight, in the second of four reports on spying by Israelis in the U.S., we learn about an Israeli-based private communications company, for whom a half-dozen of those 60 detained suspects worked. American investigators fear information generated by this firm may have fallen into the wrong hands and had the effect of impeding the Sept. 11 terror inquiry. Here’s Carl Cameron’s second report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CARL CAMERON, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-

over): Fox News has learned that some American terrorist investi-gators fear certain suspects in the Sept. 11 attacks may have man-aged to stay ahead of them, by knowing who and when investiga-tors are calling on the telephone. How?

By obtaining and analyzing data that’s generated every time someone in the U.S. makes a call.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What city and state, please?


CAMERON: Here’s how the system works. Most directory as-sistance calls, and virtually all call records and billing in the U.S. are done for the phone companies by Amdocs Ltd., an Israeli-based private elecommunications company. Amdocs has contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America, and more worldwide. The White House and other secure government phone lines are pro-tected, but it is virtually impossible to make a call on normal phones without generating an Amdocs record of it.

In recent years, the FBI and other government agencies have investigated Amdocs more than once. The firm has repeatedly and adamantly denied any security breaches or wrongdoing. But sources tell Fox News that in 1999, the super secret national secu-rity agency, headquartered in northern Maryland, issued what’s called a Top Secret sensitive compartmentalized information report, TS/SCI, warning that records of calls in the United States were get-ting into foreign hands - in Israel, in particular.

Investigators don’t believe calls are being listened to, but the data about who is calling whom and when is plenty valuable in it-self. An internal Amdocs memo to senior company executives sug-gests just how Amdocs generated call records could be used. “Widespread data mining techniques and algorithms combining both the properties of the customer (e.g., credit rating) and proper-ties of the specific ‘behavior.’” Specific behavior, such as who the customers are calling.

The Amdocs memo says the system should be used to prevent phone fraud. But U.S. counterintelligence analysts say it could also be used to spy through the phone system. Fox News has learned that the N.S.A has held numerous classified conferences to warn the F.B.I. and C.I.A. how Amdocs records could be used. At one NSA briefing, a diagram by the Argon national lab was used to show that if the phone records are not secure, major security breaches are possible.

Another briefing document said, “It has become increasingly apparent that systems and networks are vulnerable. Such crimes always involve unauthorized persons, or persons who exceed their authorization...citing on exploitable vulnerabilities.”

Those vulnerabilities are growing, because according to an-other briefing, the U.S. relies too much on foreign companies like Amdocs for high-tech equipment and software. “Many factors have led to increased dependence on code developed overseas.... We buy rather than train or develop solutions.”

U.S. intelligence does not believe the Israeli government is in-volved in a misuse of information, and Amdocs insists that its data


is secure. What U.S. government officials are worried about, how-ever, is the possibility that Amdocs data could get into the wrong hands, particularly organized crime. And that would not be the first thing that such a thing has happened. Fox News has documents of a 1997 drug trafficking case in Los Angeles, in which telephone in-formation, the type that Amdocs collects, was used to “completely compromise the communications of the FBI, the Secret Service, the DEO and the LAPD.”

We’ll have that and a lot more in the days ahead - Brit. HUME: Carl, I want to take you back to your report last night

on those 60 Israelis who were detained in the anti-terror investiga-tion, and the suspicion that some investigators have that they may have picked up information on the 9/11 attacks ahead of time and not passed it on.

There was a report, you’ll recall, that the Mossad, the Israeli in-telligence agency, did indeed send representatives to the U.S. to warn, just before 9/11, that a major terrorist attack was imminent. How does that leave room for the lack of a warning?

CAMERON: I remember the report, Brit. We did it first inter-nationally right here on your show on the 14th. What investigators are saying is that that warning from the Mossad was nonspecific and general, and they believe that it may have had something to do with the desire to protect what are called sources and methods in the intelligence community. The suspicion being, perhaps those sources and methods were taking place right here in the United States.

The question came up in select intelligence committee on Capi-tol Hill today. They intend to look into what we reported last night, and specifically that possibility - Brit.

HUME: So in other words, the problem wasn’t lack of a warn-ing, the problem was lack of useful details?

CAMERON: Quantity of information. HUME: All right, Carl, thank you very much. Part 3 BRIT HUME, HOST: Last time we reported on an Israeli-

based company called Amdocs Ltd. that generates the computer-ized records and billing data for nearly every phone call made in America. As Carl Cameron reported, U.S. investigators digging into the 9/11 terrorist attacks fear that suspects may have been tipped off to what they were doing by information leaking out of Amdocs. In tonight’s report, we learn that the concern about phone security extends to another company, founded in Israel that pro-


vides the technology that the U.S. government uses for electronic eavesdropping. Here is Carl Cameron’s third report.


over): The company is Comverse Infosys, a subsidiary of an Is-raeli-run private telecommunications firm, with offices throughout the U.S. It provides wiretapping equipment for law enforcement. Here’s how wiretapping works in the U.S.

Every time you make a call, it passes through the nation’s elaborate network of switchers and routers run by the phone com-panies. Custom computers and software, made by companies like Comverse, are tied into that network to intercept, record and store the wiretapped calls, and at the same time transmit them to investi-gators.

The manufacturers have continuing access to the computers so they can service them and keep them free of glitches. This process was authorized by the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA. Senior government officials have now told Fox News that while CALEA made wiretapping easier, it has led to a system that is seriously vulnerable to compromise, and may have undermined the whole wiretapping system.

Indeed, Fox News has learned that Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller were both warned Oct. 18 in a hand-delivered letter from 15 local, state and federal law enforcement officials, who complained that “law enforcement’s current electronic surveillance capabilities are less effective today than they were at the time CALEA was enacted.”

Congress insists the equipment it installs is secure. But the complaint about this system is that the wiretap computer programs made by Comverse have, in effect, a back door through which wiretaps themselves can be intercepted by unauthorized parties.

Adding to the suspicions is the fact that in Israel, Comverse works closely with the Israeli government, and under special pro-grams, gets reimbursed for up to 50 percent of its research and development costs by the Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade. But investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying through Comverse is considered career suicide.

And sources say that while various F.B.I. inquiries into Com-verse have been conducted over the years, they’ve been halted be-fore the actual equipment has ever been thoroughly tested for leaks. A 1999 F.C.C. document indicates several government agencies expressed deep concerns that too many unauthorized non-law en-


forcement personnel can access the wiretap system. And the FBI’s own nondescript office in Chantilly, Virginia that actually oversees the CALEA wiretapping program, is among the most agitated about the threat.

But there is a bitter turf war internally at F.B.I. It is the FBI’s office in Quantico, Virginia, that has jurisdiction over awarding contracts and buying intercept equipment. And for years, they’ve thrown much of the business to Comverse. A handful of former U.S. law enforcement officials involved in awarding Comverse government contracts over the years now work for the company.

Numerous sources say some of those individuals were asked to leave government service under what knowledgeable sources call “troublesome circumstances” that remain under administrative re-view within the Justice Department.

(END VIDEOTAPE) And what troubles investigators most, particularly in New

York, in the counter terrorism investigation of the World Trade Center attack, is that on a number of cases, suspects that they had sought to wiretap and survey immediately changed their telecom-munications processes. They started acting much differently as soon as those supposedly secret wiretaps went into place - Brit.

HUME: Carl, is there any reason to suspect in this instance that the Israeli government is involved?

CAMERON: No, there’s not. But there are growing instincts in an awful lot of law enforcement officials in a variety of agencies who suspect that it had begun compiling evidence, and a highly classified investigation into that possibility - Brit.

HUME: All right, Carl. Thanks very much. Part 4 This week, senior correspondent Carl Cameron has reported on

a longstanding government espionage investigation. Federal offi-cials this year have arrested or detained nearly 200 Israeli citizens suspected of belonging to an “organized intelligence-gathering op-eration.” The Bush administration has deported most of those ar-rested after Sept. 11, although some are in custody under the new anti-terrorism law.

Cameron also investigates the possibility that an Israeli firm generated billing data that could be used for intelligence purpose, and describes concerns that the federal government’s own wiretap-ping system may be vulnerable. Tonight, in part four of the series, we’ll learn about the probable roots of the probe: a drug case that went bad four years ago in L.A.



over): Los Angeles, 1997, a major local, state and federal drug in-vestigating sours. The suspects: Israeli organized crime with opera-tions in New York, Miami, Las Vegas, Canada, Israel and Egypt. The allegations: cocaine and ecstasy trafficking, and sophisticated white-collar credit card and computer fraud.

The problem: according to classified law enforcement docu-ments obtained by Fox News, the bad guys had the cops’ beepers, cell phones, even home phones under surveillance. Some who did get caught admitted to having hundreds of numbers and using them to avoid arrest.

“This compromised law enforcement communications between LAPD detectives and other assigned law enforcement officers working various aspects of the case. The organization discovered communications between organized crime intelligence division de-tectives, the FBI and the Secret Service.”

Shock spread from the DEA to the FBI in Washington, and then the CIA. An investigation of the problem, according to law en-forcement documents, concluded, “The organization has apparent extensive access to database systems to identify pertinent personal and biographical information.”

When investigators tried to find out where the information might have come from, they looked at Amdocs, a publicly traded firm based in Israel. Amdocs generates billing data for virtually every call in America, and they do credit checks. The company de-nies any leaks, but investigators still fear that the firm’s data is get-ting into the wrong hands.

When investigators checked their own wiretapping system for leaks, they grew concerned about potential vulnerabilities in the computers that intercept, record and store the wiretapped calls. A main contractor is Comverse Infosys, which works closely with the Israeli government, and under a special grant program, is reim-bursed for up to 50 percent of its research and development costs by Israel’s Ministry of Industry and Trade.

Asked this week about another sprawling investigation and the detention of 60 Israeli since Sept. 11, the Bush administration treated the questions like hot potatoes.

ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I would just refer you to the Department of Justice with that. I’m not familiar with the report.

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I’m aware that some Israeli citizens have been detained. With respect to why


they’re being detained and the other aspects of your question - whether it’s because they’re in intelligence services, or what they were doing - I will defer to the Department of Justice and the FBI to answer that.

(END VIDEOTAPE) CAMERON: Beyond the 60 apprehended or detained, and

many deported since Sept. 11, another group of 140 Israeli indi-viduals have been arrested and detained in this year in what gov-ernment documents describe as “an organized intelligence gather-ing operation,” designed to “penetrate government facilities.” Most of those individuals said they had served in the Israeli military, which is compulsory there.

But they also had, most of them, intelligence expertise, and ei-ther worked for Amdocs or other companies in Israel that specialize in wiretapping. Earlier this week, the Israeli embassy in Washing-ton denied any spying against or in the United States - Tony.

SNOW: Carl, we’ve heard the comments from Ari Fleischer and Colin Powell. What are officials saying behind the scenes?

CAMERON: Well, there’s real pandemonium described at the FBI, the DEA and the INS. A lot of these problems have been well known to some investigators, many of who have contributed to the reporting on this story. And what they say is happening is supervi-sors and management are now going back and collecting much of the information, because there’s tremendous pressure from the top levels of all of those agencies to find out exactly what’s going on.

At the DEA and the FBI already a variety of administration re-views are under way, in addition to the investigation of the phenomenon. They want to find out how it is all this has come out, as well as be very careful because of the explosive nature and very political ramifications of the story itself - Tony.

SNOW: All right, Carl, thanks. Naive Unsophisticated, Uninformed, Uninquisitive American Public, Enabling to Occur A Series of Great Tragedies Ample information was available to the American public that, if

they had made the effort to become aware of it, and have had the cour-age to exercise the responsibilities that go with the form of government in the United States, the many disasters and great human sufferings that have resulted would most probably not have occurred.


Although the United States has numerous checks and balances, in my very first book published in 1978 and every one since then, I have detailed the failure of them to work.

As examples, if the tens of millions of people in the United States that have an infatuation with sports would spend one percent of the time spent on them to reading books relating to serious matters in gov-ernment, and if one percent of that one percent would show some sem-blance of courage and outrage, it is probable that these tragedies could have been prevented.

In 2008, for instance, it had been reported that over fifty percent of American adults never read a book, and of the remaining adults, they may read one, and never more than six, a year. And of that number, many are probably of the nature of Harry Potter or some other trivia.

Is it any wonder that such politicians as George W. Bush could re-peatedly utter outright lies and most of the people believed him.


CHAPTER SEVEN

Another Terrorist Aviation Disaster?

wo months after four groups of terrorists hijacked four airliners and crashed two of them into the World Trade Center, another aviation disaster occurred in the same area. On November 12,

2001, an American Airlines Airbus 300-600, Flight 587, departed Ken-nedy Airport in New York for Santa Domingo Airports, crashing myste-riously shortly after takeoff.

As the aircraft climbed from John F. Kennedy airport, people on the ground saw an explosion and fire on the underneath side of the aircraft, which was quickly followed by parts falling off the aircraft, including first the vertical stabilizer and rudder and then one of the engines. It then plunged to the ground on the narrow strip of land known as Rock-away. The death toll was 251 passengers and 9 crewmembers plus five on the ground.

As with the downing of TWA Flight 800 just a few miles from this location, the NTSB ignored the many eyewitness reports by such peo-ple as professional police and firemen, and sought to blame the crash on mechanical failure of the vertical stabilizer.

The same tactics of discrediting eyewitness reports commenced. It is true that there are often varying description of certain matters relating to aircraft in distress, but when almost all the witnesses, and particular professionals with experience in investigative work, report fires or ex-plosions, relatively minor matters of divergent reports, such as what side of the aircraft, etc. does not take from the fact that a fire or explo-sion did in fact occur.

Initial NTSB Statements NTSB board officials suggested the cause of the crash might be due

to wake turbulence from an aircraft that departed earlier. But the light turbulence from such an encounter does not even register on the scale of the type of extreme turbulence that aircraft undergo from atmos-

T


pheric disturbances such as in the vicinity of thunderstorms. Then the political board members suggested that the composite ver-

tical stabilizer was faulty and ripped off the aircraft. The board mem-bers suggested that maybe the pilots applied excessive rudder move-ment, implying that the aircraft was made of balsa wood and that pilot input to the rudder caused the tail to rip loose. But these excuses by political appointees conflicted with the numerous reports by witnesses with professional backgrounds that reported fire and explosions coming from the rear of the aircraft before the vertical stabilizer ripped from the aircraft.

If Flight 587 was brought down by one or more explosive devices, they could have been planted in the baggage compartments, possibly in passenger luggage, cargo, or placed there by baggage handlers.

Lying By Government Personnel Is Standard Policy It must be understood that many government personnel will lie for

various reasons. I have documented that fact associated with prior air-line disasters, starting while I was a federal air safety agent. Outright blatant lying and cover-ups by the political NTSB board members are the norm, some examples described in these pages and very heavily documented in my book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th and 21st Centuries.

Aircraft Fly Quite Well With the Rudder and Vertical Stabilizer Ripped Off Large airline and military aircraft fly quite well with the rudder and

vertical stabilizer totally ripped off. One example was that of a four-engine B-52 military bomber that experienced the loss of its rudder and vertical stabilizer over Japan. The following is a picture of that incident as the aircraft flew over Japan:

Another Terrorist Aviation Disaster? 223

Most Probable Sequence of Events Here is the sequence of events as determined from eyewitness ac-

counts, radar records, and aircraft recorders: • An explosion and fire on the bottom rear of the aircraft was seen

and reported by numerous people on the ground. • The vertical stabilizer and other segments of the aircraft separated

after the appearance of the fire in the vicinity of the rear baggage compartment.

• As the aircraft is approaching the narrow strip of land at the far end of Jamaica Bay, one engine separates from the aircraft. As the air-craft dove to the ground, another engine separated from the aircraft. Eyewitness Statements From Professionals A well investigated investigative article in the local newspaper at

Rockaway, The Wave, took the statements of numerous people, in-cluded retired police and firefights, who had witnessed the sequence of events happening with American Airlines Flight 587. The following include the statements of some of those witnesses:

Tom Lynch, a retired firefighter who saw the plane in flight, said that he Lynch sent a statement to the NTSB, but no attempt was made to interview him in person about what he saw. He stated:

I saw the plane. It had a small contained explosion in the fuselage. The explosion was probably the size of a small automobile. The tail was still on the plane at the time and it continued to fly towards Rockaway. Victor Trombettas, who saw Flight 587, started obtaining witness

statements that he placed on an Internet site after he felt the NTSB was covering up for what actually happened. (www.usread.com). One wit-ness, who Trombettas identified as Witness Alpha, was a former Spe-cial Forces member familiar with military weapons and a retired New York City police officer.

Alpha spotted Flight 587 as it was climbing out of JFK Airport, and said the flight looked normal until suddenly a white and yellow explo-sive flash appeared in the fuselage behind the wing, which he described as an ordinance explosion. The flash was followed by a stream of smoke seen by John Power and other witnesses before the plane oscil-lated violently shortly before plunging to the ground. The events were sufficient revealing that Alpha was on his portable phone calling emer-gency services while Flight 587 was still airborne.

John Powers was walking his dog when he looked up at Flight 587, having a clear and unobstructed view of the flight path of the aircraft. He stated that he saw an “enormous flash or explosion ... near where


the wing meets the fuselage.” He explained that he noticed smoke com-ing from the right engine as soon as he noticed the plane. He stated he saw more of the right side of the plane and what looked to him like a fire or explosive-type flash on the wing near the fuselage. He said the plane rolled violently from side to side several times and then the verti-cal stabilizer ripped from the aircraft. He described this as noticing a “huge rectangular piece fly free” from the plane and begins a slow “float” down towards the water of Jamaica Bay. He was positive about the tail being intact during the initial rolls.

A construction worker who saw the aircraft in flight, Antonio Vil-lela, said, “First I heard a big explosion. Then I saw flames come out from behind the plane.”

A retired New York police department Lieutenant stated during an interview (January 19, 2002) that he saw two explosions. The first, a smaller one, was behind the wing near the fuselage. The second was much larger and engulfed much of the plane. He said the plane was in-tact at the time of the first explosion. These observations strongly indi-cated a bomb explosion in the rear baggage compartment.

Firefighter Tom Lynch stated (January 19,2002) that he saw two explosions, the first, a smaller one behind the wing near the fuselage and then a much larger second explosion.

On The Wave’s web site were additional names, and a few are added here:

James P. Conrad, Brooklyn. Conrad was on Rockaway Point Boulevard at the Fort Tilden traffic light. His attention was drawn to the plane because it was unusually low and at a location where he normally did not see planes. “I saw a puff of white smoke come from the right side of the plane’s body, just behind the right wing. Then, there was a large explosion engulfing the body of the plane from the wing back to the tail. It was then seven or eight seconds before the plane crashed into the ground.” Conrad added that “just before the plane passed over the seawall, there were debris pieces of all sizes dropping from the plane and through the smoke.” Rhoda Ross, Cronston Avenue and Beach 125. Ross first was alerted to the plane when her house shook. Pieces of the aircraft “fell all around” her house. While she never saw the plane, she heard the explosion and the plane passing over her home. Joann Catanese, Beach 60 and the Boardwalk. The ex-NYPD ser-geant was at Beach 60 Street and the boardwalk when an explosion drew her attention to the plane. She says that she saw “an area from


the left wing to the tail go on fire.” She adds that she saw “some-thing fall from the plane and float to the north.” Tom Lynch, Beach 151 Street and Rockaway Beach Boulevard. The ex-firefighter was nearby the Neponsit Home when he noticed the plane “lower than usual.” As he watched, he saw “an orange-red explosion, about the size of a small car,” on the right side of the plane. The plane flew on normally for two or three seconds and then there was a “larger, second burst of flames, like a match on a grill.” At that time, he says, “a piece of the plane separates, a piece that I first thought was the wing, but might have been the tail.” He continued watching for a few seconds more as it “started a curved dive into the ground.” Barbara Johnston , 400 Block of Beach 124 . Johnston was on the porch of her home when she was attracted by the noise of a plane low in the sky. She had a view of the left side of the plane and its tail. The plane was “level, but losing altitude,” she says. Neil MacLeod, Broad Channel Subway Station. MacLeod was waiting for the Manhattan train when some teens yelled “Look at that plane.” He looked up, “There was fire and smoke coming from under the plane, where the right wing and the fuselage join.” he adds. He says that there were “pieces falling off the plane, moving along with it.” During the last few seconds prior to the crash, he says that a “long, rectangular piece came off the plane.” Barbara Morris, Gateway National Park Golf Course. Morris was waiting to swing when she heard a plane with an “engine that was stalling out.” She looked up at the plane and saw “an explosion, smoke and fire.” She watched as the plane continued on and its en-gine fell off prior to its crash. Mary Ellen Murray, Four Hundred Block of Beach 124. “I only saw flames coming from the wing closest to the bay,” she says. Patrick Twohig, 100 Block of Beach 114. Twohig, a retired priest, was on the second floor of his home, when he heard “a loud bang, different from the one you hear in a car accident.” He looked out the window and saw the plane, which “seemed to drop and the went level again.” Twohig says that “right after the bang, I saw smoke and flames towards the rear of the aircraft. I saw lots of air-craft parts fall from the plane, but I don’t know what parts of the


plane they were from.” He watched until the plane crashed and he saw the thick, black smoke. Maureen Hagner, Beach 124 and Rockaway Beach Boulevard. Hagner was attracted to the plane because she “thought it was the Concorde” passing over. She looked up and saw the plane on fire. She says that she found “what appeared to be the cargo door” of the plane on Beach 125 Street. Michael D. Benjamin, Flatbush Avenue, nearby Nick’s Seafood and Toys Are Us. Benjamin and his family were driving south on Flat-bush Avenue, heading for the Belt Parkway, when his daughter said, “look, that plane is on fire.” He looked up and saw a “huge fire” on the plane’s fuselage. He continued to watch until the plane crashed into Rockaway. Angela Fogarty, Eastbound on the Belt Parkway between Knapp Street and Flatbush Avenue. Fogarty saw “an explosion followed by a fireball and then by smoke. “The fire lasted only a second or so, but the smoke lasted until the plane crashed,” she says. Fogarty adds that she “saw something large fall from the plane, I guess that it was really the tail.” There were many other reports listed in the newspaper. For NTSB

or DOJ investigators to ignore these many reports were irresponsible and a clear sign of a cover-up, as would occur time and time again.

Typical Ignoring of Professional Witness Statements Despite these reports indicating an explosion, NTSB chairman

Marion Blakey ruled out any criminal or terrorists activity during her appearance on National Public Radio on January 8, 2002. It was as if the politically-appointed NTSB board members were determined that the public not hear of another terrorist success. This pattern was similar to what occurred with the downing of TWA Flight 800. It appears the NTSB was under pressure from higher government sources to rule out a terrorist act.

NTSB cover-ups of sensitive matters relating to airline crashes is an old-hat scenario that I have watched for 40 years. I wrote letters to the NTSB while a federal air safety inspector accusing the govern-ment’s accident investigation agency of cover-ups. I reported it as relat-ing to the cover-up involved in the PSA San Diego crash. I even filed a


federal lawsuit at San Francisco against the NTSB, addressing these federal offenses.

Some of the witnesses to the events occurring on Flight 587 were so concerned about the NTSB cover-up that they sent a letter to NTSB chairwoman, Marion Blakey demanding to have their statements taken. Blakey, a politically correct appointee, responded in a March 1, 2002, letter stating that during the public hearing they may be allowed to tes-tify. Long before the hearing, the NTSB should have obtained all the evidence that they knew existed, including witness statements, to en-able them to concentrate on the areas most likely to be the cause of the crash.

Further Indication AAL 587 was Blown UP Al Qaeda provided a list to the Global Islamic Media Group (May

28, 2004), of terrorist acts for which it took responsibility. The group then posted the list on its web site. Included in the list was American Airlines Flight 587, which crashed into the borough of Queens in New York City. Their claims provided additional support for the many wit-ness reports stating they saw an explosion on Flight 587 before it crashed. Among the terrorist acts stated in the list provided by al Qaeda were the following: • Bomb attack in Kuwait at Faylakah. • Bomb attack in Yemen upon a French tanker. • Bomb attack in Mombasa, Kenya. • Bomb attack upon a Bali, Indonesia nightclub that killed over 200

people. • Bomb attack upon the Jewish temple in Djerba, Tunisia, that killed

almost two dozen Jews. • Missile firing upon an El Al airliner in Kenya that failed to hit the

aircraft. • Bomb attack at the Marriott Hotel in Indonesia. • Attack in the residential area of Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. • Bomb attack against Jewish synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey. • Bombing of American Airlines Flight 587.

Additional Support that Terrorists Brought Down Flight 587 Further information relating to the alleged bombing of Flight 587

came from the report of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), which was addressed in several foreign newspaper articles, in-cluding Canada’s National Post (August 27, 2004). The National Post article carried the title, “Montreal man downed U.S. Plane, CSIS told.” The article stated:

A captured al-Qaeda operative has told Canadian intelligence


investigators that a Montreal man who trained in Afghanistan alongside the 9/11 hijackers was responsible for the crash of an American Airlines flight in New York three years ago.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service agents were told during five days of interviews with the source that Abderraouf Jdey, a Ca-nadian citizen also known as Farouk the Tunisian, had downed the plane with explosives on Nov. 12, 2001.

The source claimed Jdey had used his Canadian passport to board Flight 587 and “conducted a suicide mission” with a small bomb similar to the one used by convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid, a “Top Secret” Canadian government report says.

Jdey, 39, came to Canada from Tunisia in 1991 and became a citizen in 1995. Shortly after getting his Canadian passport, he left for Afghanistan and trained with some of the Sept. 11 hijackers, ac-cording to the 9/11 commission in the United States.

He recorded a “martyrdom” video, but was dropped from the 9/11 mission after returning to Canada in the summer of 2001. The planner of the World Trade Center attack, Khalid Sheikh Moham-med, claims Jdey was recruited for a “second wave” of suicide at-tacks.

The information on Jdey’s alleged role in the plane crash is contained in a memo on captured Canadian al-Qaeda operative Mohammed Mansour Jabarah. The Canadian government memo was written in May, 2002, and was based on information provided by a “source of unknown reliability.”

Jabarah is a 22-year-old from St. Catharines who allegedly joined al- Qaeda and convinced Osama bin Laden to give him a ter-ror assignment. He was tasked with overseeing a suicide-bombing operation in Southeast Asia, but was caught and has since pleaded guilty in the United States.

The report, which was sent to the Philippine National Police In-telligence directorate, recounts what Jabarah said he was told about the U.S. plane crash by Abu Abdelrahman, a Saudi al-Qaeda mem-ber who was working for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

“In discussions, Abu Abdelrahman mentioned AL QAIDA was responsible for the assassination of Massoud, the Northern Alliance leader,” the report says. “According to the source, Abu Abdelrah-man added that the 12 November 2001 plane crash (American Air-lines flight 587) in Queens, New York was not an accident as re-ported in the press but was actually an AL QAIDA operation.

“Abu Abdelrahman informed Jabarah that Farouk the Tunisian conducted a suicide mission on the aeroplane using a shoe bomb of


the type used by Richard Reid … ‘Farouk the Tunisian’ was identi-fied from newspaper photographs as being identical to Abderraouf Jdey, a Canadian citizen who had resided in Montreal.”

Jabarah was initially suspect of the claim about Jdey, but he later believed it after he saw the same information on a “mujahedin Web site,” the report says.

Jdey allegedly used his Canadian passport in boarding Flight 587, but because Jdey used many aliases in the past, it wasn’t known what name he might have used. Among his many aliases were Abd Al-Rauf Bin Al-Habib Bin Yousef Al-Jiddi, Aderraouf Dey, A Raouf Jdey, Abdal Ra’Of Bin Muhammed Bin Yousef Al-Jadi, Farouq Al-Tunisi, Abderraouf Ben Habib.

Suicide Bombings of U. S. Airliners were Easy to Carry Out If the reports are correct that al Qaeda operative Jdey carried a

bomb onto Flight 587, and caused the downing of the aircraft, it must be realized that at that time there were no detection devices or dog snif-fers to determine if passengers had explosives as they boarded the air-craft. Plastic-type explosives can be molded into shapes that are easily hidden in carry-on baggage or in the lining of clothes being worn. And with the enormous quantity of carry-on baggage allowed on U.S. airlin-ers, detecting such explosives would be highly improbable. Unpublicized Series of Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Airliners? If American Airlines Flight 587 was downed through terrorist acts, it would be the sixth in a series of terrorist downing of U.S. airliners in the Eastern part of the United States: the four on September 11, 2001, the fifth, American Airlines on November 12, 2001, and the sixth being the downing of TWA Flight 800 with a missile. Obviously, the terrorist attacks on U.S. airliners on 9/11 couldn’t be covered up. But the others could be, as long as media people cooper-ated by not reporting such matters as witness statements, and the American public showed no more interest in questioning the official spin than in prior airline disasters. Also, it was difficult for the average person, unaware of the extent of corruption in government offices, to recognize that the political members of the National Transportation Safety Board would falsify and cover-up for the actual cause of the crash. I’ve addressed NTSB cover-ups for the past 35 years. Even I, at one time, would have found that difficult to believe. However, after holding a key position in the government’s aviation safety offices, it didn’t take me long to discover that fact. The lawsuit I filed against the NTSB sought a court order forcing the NTSB to in-clude material evidence in its report of several aviation crashes. Shortly after I filed that action, assistant U.S. attorney George Stoll called me


on the telephone and told me that he was recommending to his superi-ors in Washington that they support my action. Washington Justice Department ordered him to block my efforts. It is hard for the average public to comprehend government offi-cials lying and covering up, but I had the opportunity while holding a key government aviation safety position to see the cover-ups by the political NTSB board members, followed by other government officials and even federal judges.

American Airlines Flight 587

CHAPTER EIGHT

Continuing FBI-DOJ Cultural Problems

he deep-seated, embedded, cultural problems that I have seen since my early days in the Navy, which were the primary rea-sons for the intelligence failures and failures to act on known

intelligence, were covered up by the system investigating itself. And this cover-up will continue the resulting tragedies.

A Few Highlights to FBI-DOJ Cultural Problems In every one of my dozen or so books I provide insider details on

the cultural problems—the corruption—of people in control of the FBI and other divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice, one of the most misnamed of all government agencies.

During the past ten years over a dozen government agents were caught passing confidential information to unauthorized sources outside of government that they obtained from government databases. In 1996, FBI agent Earl Pitts was discovered providing information to the Rus-sians. In 1996, Russian informants told Justice Department officials that an FBI agent had been selling U.S. secrets to the Soviet Union and its successor, the Russian federation, for the past twenty years. This information led to the arrest in 1996 of FBI counter intelligence agent Robert Hanssen, who had received over $1.4 million in cash and gifts for selling out the United States.

Hanssen provided secret intelligence information to G.R.U., the Soviet military intelligence, since 1979. Investigation revealed that over 50 people providing confidential information to the FBI were ex-posed by Hanssen to the Russians. This breach of security severely compromised America’s intelligence operations, and resulted in many informants being killed. Among those executed as a result of Hanssen’s disclosure was Russian General Dmitri Polyakov of the G.R.U.

Hanssen first spied for the KGB and then for Russia’s Foreign In-telligence Service. During this period Hanssen worked for the FBI and

T


on assignment to the State Department, with access to documents about suspected intelligence agents posted in this country and Soviet and Russian agents working for the United States.

Hanssen obtained most of his information from the FBI’s auto-mated case support system (ACS), which could be accessed by any FBI agent, including office clerks.

Hanssen said (November 2000) of the FBI’s internal security, “It was pathetic. It’s criminal negligence. Any clerk in the bureau could come up with stuff on that system. It’s criminal what’s laid out.” Hanssen admitted downloading from the FBI’s computer system nearly 1,000 sheets of highly classified material

Hanssen admitted his disdain for U.S. leaders and their policies and conduct, stating: “The United States can be errantly likened to a power-fully built but retarded child, potentially dangerous, but young, imma-ture and easily manipulated.” Many insiders would have no trouble agreeing with that description.

It is estimated that Hanssen revealed to the Soviet Union and Rus-sia some of the most important U.S. secrets including those of the Na-tional Security Agency (NSA), the State Department security, the CIA, causing incalculable damage to national security.

Hanssen admitted receiving at least $600,000 in cash and having $800, 000 deposited in a Moscow bank. Despite causing the execution of several Russian sources spying for the United States, he avoided the death sentence and the pension that he would have received upon re-tirement was allowed to go to his wife.

Typical Example of FBI Level of Intelligence If it hadn’t been for a source inside Russia offering to sell informa-

tion to the United States about Hanssen, Hanssen’s identity might still be a secret and he could have continued selling U.S. secrets. In my various books I’ve given other examples of the bungling by U.S. intel-ligence personnel.

When Hanssen sought to renew his spying for Russia in 1993 after the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Russians thought they were being set up and protested to the United States about an incident. They stated that a disaffected FBI agent had approached a Russian officer at his residence in Washington, offering to sell him classified information. That agent was Hanssen.

Hanssen’s lavish life style was far out of reach of the FBI salary, but the FBI did not react to this clue. Even Hanssen’s brother-in-law advised the FBI that Hanssen’s financial situation and other characteris-tics strongly suggested he was receiving large sums of money from other sources. Nothing came of that warning.

Continuing FBI-DOJ Cultural Problems 233

Late Discovery of CIA Spy Aldrich Ames From 1985 to 1994, until he was caught, CIA agent Aldrich Ames

passed highly sensitive information to the Soviet Union and the Rus-sians, including the names of Soviet and Warsaw Pact agents who had been recruited by the CIA and FBI. This information caused over a dozen of them to be subsequently executed. The damage caused by his spying was characterized as the most damaging in the nation’s history.

Ames alerted Moscow that a U.S. state department employee, Felix Bloch, was being investigated, after which Moscow alerted Bloch to this fact. This prevented the United States from obtaining evidence on Bloch’s prior activities while he was chargė ď affaires at the U.S. Em-bassy in Vienna. He was fired in 1990 on the grounds that he lied to investigators. The question remains, what other moles exist in the FBI and CIA, and other government entities.

Other Examples of Deep-Seated Corruption in FBI Offices Numerous newspaper reports and court documents revealed the

close relationship between FBI agents in the Boston office and the Win-ter Hill gang headed by Boston mob boss James J. “Whitey” Bulger and Steven Flemmi that continued for over 20 years. During this entire period FBI agents knew the gang was committing numerous murders, of which 19 were identified.

Bulger had been one of the top FBI’s informants, being initially used for providing information about a rival gang involving Italian mobsters. FBI agents provided Bulger advance information about in-formants—who were subsequently killed, about upcoming wiretaps, investigations and indictments, permitting Bulger to escape punish-ment. FBI agents withheld evidence from the U.S. attorney, Boston city police, and Massachusetts State Police, to protect Bulger and his gang.

The FBI’s criminal cover-up of the murders and other crimes com-mitted by the Boston FBI office caused the U.S. Attorney’s office and the Massachusetts State Police to withhold any information from the agency.

Finally, in January 1995, the state police and the U.S. Attorney’s of-fice obtained sufficient evidence to indict Bulger and his top aid, “The Rifleman” Flemmi, with plans to arrest them in quick succession. How-ever, FBI agent John Connolly warned Bulger, causing him to flee. Only Flemmi was arrested.

During a subsequent trial, Judge Mark Wolf issued findings of facts on September 15, 1999, showing that eighteen FBI supervisors and agents had committed illegal acts involving the handling of informants. The findings of facts stated in part:

The court concludes that in early January 1995, Connolly, who remained close to Flemmi and particularly, Bulger, had been monitoring the grand


jury investigation in part through his contacts in the FBI, and was the source of the tip to Bulger.

The facts surfacing in this FBI corruption showed that the U.S. at-

torney didn’t trust the Boston police or Massachusetts State police; the State police didn’t trust the FBI or the Boston police; and that sharing information would be disastrous. But young President Bush, with no real-world experience in these matters, was going to correct the intelli-gence problems that played a role in the September 11 terrorist attacks by forcing the placement of sensitive information from all intelligence and law enforcement agencies onto a computer system available to thousands of additional government personnel.

Murderous Conduct of FBI Agent in NYC Offices About the time the FBI corruption in the Boston office was fading

from the few media sources that revealed the FBI corruption, the same started surfacing in the New York City FBI offices. This is described in more detail in my FBI, CIA, the Mob, and Treachery book, but basi-cally, FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio had been a double-agent in the FBI working for and with Colombo Mafia figure Gregory Scarpa. The reports surfacing showed that DeVecchio was involved in several murders, bank robberies, passing classified information to the Mafia, obstructing FBI, DOJ and state investigations of Mafia figures, all known to officials in Washington.

FBI Special Agent Richard Taus, the main figure in that FBI book, described to me how DeVecchio repeatedly closed down Taus’ investi-gations of Mafia figures—and also corrupt acts of the CIA and White House politicians.

My CIA Sources Revealed FBI Corruption for Years Information provided to me during the past fifteen years by many

CIA and other covert government agent sources revealed years of FBI corruption, some of which is detailed in the latest editions of Defraud-ing America and Drugging America.

Commission Investigation and Recommendation As a result of media publicity from the Hanssen case, a special

seven-member investigative commission was formed in 2001, headed by former FBI and CIA director William Webster. During the investiga-tion, they found that the New York FBI field office refused to put intel-ligence information into the FBI’s ACS system because of knowledge that the information could be misused. The commission’s final report (April 2002) described how an intern from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was able to break into highly confidential FBI database files during an afternoon of effort.


9/11 Commission Recommendation The commission’s final report stated, “The bureau [FBI] should

carefully consider adopting the system of compartmenting human sources information developed by the CIA.” The panel’s recommenda-tion was critical of the FBI’s decision after September 11 terrorist at-tacks to loosen restrictions on the sharing of classified information that was on FBI computers.

At about the same time, President Bush recommended consolidat-ing the 15 intelligence agencies and making the classified information available to the tens of thousands of personnel throughout these offices.

In my book, Drugging America, I describe how classified informa-tion was made available to major drug cartels, resulting in confidential informants being murdered.

Intelligence Failures: Product of Deep-Seated Culture in US Even though intelligence failures relating to 9/11 were strictly sec-

ondary to the area of primary blame for the success of the hijackers, they were not innocent failures. The failures were due to such factors as retaliating against government personnel who sought to report terrorist activities being ignored or covered up; related to a pattern of criminal activities against the government by government agents that compro-mised their primary responsibility of protecting U.S. interests.

Years of Advance Warning Using Airliners as Missiles People in the intelligence agencies knew for years that terrorists

were planning to hijack U.S. airliners and fly them into building. They knew how to prevent hijackers from seizing airliners if the hijackers managed to get on board the aircraft. The FBI knew of suspected Mid-dle East terrorists taking pilot training in the United States, and even taking lessons in aircraft simulators to fly large airliners, with no inter-est in taking off and landing.

For several months there was considerable talk on the streets of the Middle East about terrorist planning to shortly hijack U.S. airliners. If the FAA was under competent leadership, orders could have been is-sued that within 24 hours would have put into place the two simple measures that I and other federal air safety inspectors had reported for years: remove cockpit door keys from the flight attendants and never open the cockpit door in flight.

On August 17, 2001, the month before the September 11 hijack-ings, an alert flight instructor in Minneapolis reported his suspicions to the FBI about Zacarias Moussaoui, who wanted to take simulator train-ing in a Boeing 767, but who had no interest in learning how to take it off or land. Moussaoui was believed to have been one of the planned September 11 hijackers.

French intelligence officials notified the United States that Mous-


saoui was on a 1999 watch list and known to be an extremist. After Zacarias was arrested on immigration charges, the Justice Department denied local FBI agents permission to examine his laptop computer.

Mohamed Atta, who is believed to be the terrorist who piloted the American Airlines plane into the World Trade Center, was a suspect implicated in a 1986 bus bombing in Israel. He traveled in and out of the United States on an expired visa. Khalid Al Midhar, another of the September 11 hijackers, was on a CIA watch list in January 2001 after the United States determined that he played a role in the bombing of the USS Cole three months earlier. Another hijacker, Nawaf Alhazmi, was also being sought for questioning by the FBI. What a system!

Two of the hijackers who were taking pilot lessons in the United States abandoned their small plane on a taxiway of a busy airport. After the engine stopped, they simply walked away from the plane, blocking a major taxi way used by airliners. This conduct did not arouse any at-tention by the FAA or the FBI.

INS did not keep a list of those who traveled to the United States on a temporary visa, and did not know if they left the United States when the visa expired, or if they showed up at the school for training for which the visa was approved.

Manila Police Discovered Plans To Crash Hijacked Airliners into Buildings In Manila, in 1995, the Philippine government turned information

over to the United States about plans to hijack airliners and fly them into prominent buildings. This information was discovered after a fire occurred in an apartment rented by suspected terrorist, Ramzi Yousef, who was suspected as one of the terrorists in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Immediately after the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, Yousef fled the United States for Manila, where he planned to place liquid explosives on U.S. airliners that he felt would not be detected by airport metal detectors. While working with the liquid in his Manila apartment a fire erupted. Yousef fled before police arrived, but his part-ner, Abdul Hakim Murad, was caught. Between documents that were found in the apartment, files on Yousef’s computer, and questioning of Yousef’s partner, plans were discovered to hijack U.S. airliners and fly them into prominent buildings and to place bombs on 11 U.S. airliners departing Far East locations. Avelino Razon of the Philippine Police said that Yousef was a member of the Ramzi terrorist cell in the conti-nental United States.

Based upon a photo on Yousef’s abandoned computer, Malaysian police arrested Khan Amin Shah, who later admitted that he provided


money and fake passports to Yousef and another accomplice, Abdul Hakim Murad.

Police reports and statements by Philippine police and intelligence personnel, showed that the pair were part of a plot to seize commercial airlines and fly them into buildings, as was subsequently done on Sep-tember 11, 2001. One police report made in 1995 included the state-ment of an officer, “Murad’s idea is that he will board any American commercial aircraft pretending to be an ordinary passenger, then he will hijack said aircraft, control its cockpit and dive it at the CIA head-quarters. There will be no bomb or any explosive that he will use in its execution. It is a suicidal mission that he is very much willing to exe-cute.”

Filipino authorities told Associated Press reporters that they promptly shared the information with FBI agents in Manila. The chief of intelligence for the Philippine National Police told USA reporters, “They didn’t appreciate the info coming from the Philippine police.”

One of the Philippine police officers who oversaw Murad’s interro-gation, Rodolfo Mendoza, said, after September 11, “It’s exactly as Murad said, ‘I will hijack a commercial plane and crash it into a build-ing.”

Murad described to Philippine authorities how he and Yousef trav-eled throughout the United States and obtained flight training at differ-ent schools in New York, Texas, California and North Carolina. He named almost a dozen other Middle East men at these flight schools who were also getting pilot training, including people from the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

When asked by Philippine police, “You are willing to die for Allah or for Islamic?” Murad replied, “Yes. All my thinking was that I should fight the Americans.”

Murad and Yousef eventually were convicted in the United States and sentenced to life in prison in a plot to blow up 11 U.S.-bound air-liners flying out of Asia.

Prior Attempt to Crash an Airliner Into a Major Landmark In 1996 hijackers belonging to an Algerian terrorist organization

with connections to the Osama bin Laden al Qaeda group took over an Air France airliner on a flight from Algiers to Paris via Marseille. The hijackers took control of the aircraft after departing Algiers and upon landing at Marseille the hijackers demanded that three times the normal amount of fuel be placed on the aircraft over what was normal for that otherwise short flight.

Before the refueling was completed, security personnel stormed the aircraft and subdued the hijackers. It was learned that the hijackers planned to crash the aircraft into the Eiffel Tower.


In 2001, terrorists had planned to fly a plane loaded with bombs into the building where world leaders were meeting in Geneva. Extra security thwarted this plan.

FEMA Study Predicted Airliners Crashing Into Landmarks Bradley Ayers, former CIA agent during the Cuban missile crisis, a

former U.S. Army Ranger, and later part of a special section of the Fed-eral Emergency Management Agency. (FEMA) Ayers wrote:

My task, together with a small, select group of highly qualified officers from other services and civilian experts from several key agencies of government, was to freely brainstorm and evaluate America’s vulnerabilities to internal terrorist attack.

Ours was a very focused undertaking. We were directed to real-istically create scenarios envisioning ways in which radical mili-tants might strike within the United States employing only materi-als, equipment and devices that were readily available in the course and conduct of everyday life in our country. We came up with a number of possible schemes by which someone bent on cre-ating substantial havoc within the U.S. might exploit existing weak-nesses in general and commercial (airline) security and flight operations.

Among the scenarios we developed was one that envisioned trained terrorist pilots using rented general aviation airplanes, or commandeering air cargo or airline aircraft and deliberately crashing them into political targets. Our list included the White House, the Pentagon, the Empire State Building, nuclear power planets, and weapons storage facilities. To us, the use of a fuel-laden plane, possibly with explosives aboard, as a guided missile was not only obvious but also feasible within minimum ingenuity on the part of the perpetrators.

We completed our work, formalized it and sent it on to FEMA headquarters. Later, while working with DEA and ATF, I learned that the study was circulated among a number of federal agencies and generally discounted as being “unthinkable” and too “far out” to be realistically considered.

We’ve had plenty of wakeup calls: hostage taking, hijackings, barracks, embassies and buildings bombed, subways poisoned, na-val ships blown up. It was only a matter of time for the terrorists to put it all together on American soil.

In my books, Defrauding America and Drugging America, Ayers

discovery of corruption in the CIA and Justice Department is detailed.


Focusing on Cockroaches Instead of Major Problems A nation that allows a cockroach or some other insect or rodent to

shut down multi-million-dollar construction projects, or causes people to go to prison if a dead frog results, is hardly competent to tackle or defend against down-to-earth adversaries. Americans allow obstruction-ists to block badly needed runways, such as San Francisco Interna-tional, which creates safety hazards, on the fear that gravel that may take up 1/1000 of water area in the bay, or is hazardous to something or other.

American Culture of Cover-Ups, Denial, and Felonious America has a deeply entrenched culture of cover-ups, denial, cow-

ardice, and stupidity that has gotten far worse than existed at Pearl Har-bor. September 11 was preceded by far more than the usual state of de-nial; it was preceded by documented corruption that did not exist in 1941.

I was in naval aviation a year prior to the December 7, 1941, bomb-ing of Pearl Harbor, and the stupidity before my eyes in the face of imminent Japanese attacks was astounding, and more than just an intel-ligence failure. More people were killed on September 11 than at Pearl Harbor, and the blame, the criminal misconduct, making possible Sep-tember 11 goes far beyond the Pearl Harbor tragedy.

Chaotic Handling of Informants Among the problems in obtaining insider information from foreign

sources are the false promises by U.S. agents that are often never kept. Some examples. Boris Korczak, a KGB agent, who I had known for several years, operated a KGB front company in Copenhagen while he was a double agent for the CIA. His value ended abruptly when an in-toxicated CIA case officer blew his cover at a Soviet Embassy recep-tion (1979). This disclosure caused two assassination attempts to be made on Korczak, including one while grocery shopping in a Washing-ton, D.C. suburb.

Three al Qaeda defectors provided testimony against four members of Osama bin Laden’s 1998 bombings of embassy buildings in East Africa. The promises that were given to them were not kept. A crewmember on a Jordanian airliner that was hijacked by the Lebanese Amal Militia was promised protection and other benefits for testifying in 1998 against one of the hijackers, Fawaz Younis. The crewmember, Omer al-Ghadi, was promised a new identity, a job, and $1 million for his testimony. “Ghadi later said, “I kept my word to testify, but the American government did not keep their word to me.”

A key witness against a Palestinian terrorist in a trial involving the 1982 bombing of a Pan Am flight that departed Tokyo for Honolulu was another informant who was deceived. Adnan Awad was a key wit-


ness against one of the hijackers, Mohammed Rashid. In the 1960s a senior KGB officer, Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko, de-

fected to the United States and then was held in virtual isolation by the CIA at its training facility at Camp Peary in Virginia. Another KGB officer, Vitaly Yurchenko, who had directed spy operations against the United States, defected to the United States. But because of poor treat-ment he returned to the Soviet Union.

An article in the San Francisco Daily Journal (December 14, 2001) made reference to keeping Americans uninformed about misconduct in government offices:

President Bush invoked executive privilege for the first time Thurs-day to keep Congress from seeing documents of prosecutors’ decision-making in cases ranging from a decades-old Boston mur-der to the Clinton-era fund-raising probe. Did Israel Government Know of the Planned Hijackings? During a televised interview, Brit Hume, the host, said: “Carl, what

about this question of advanced knowledge of what was going to hap-pen on 9/11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known something?” Carl Cameron responded: “It’s very explosive information, obviously, and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected. A bigger question, they say, is how they could not have known?” The transcript of the Fox News Service report of De-cember 12, 2001, with host Brit Hume and Fox New correspondent Carl Cameron, stated in part:

Suspected Israeli Spies Held by U.S. Some 60 Israelis, who federal investigators have said are part

of a long-running effort to spy on American government officials, are among the hundreds of foreigners detained since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, Fox News has learned.

The Israelis, a handful of whom are described as active Israeli military or intelligence operatives, have been detained on immigra-tion charges or under the new Patriot Anti-Terrorism Law. Federal investigators said some of them failed polygraph questions inquir-ing about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.

There is no indication the Israelis were involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, but investigators suspect that they may have gathered intel-ligence about the attacks in advance and not shared it.

A highly placed investigator told Fox News there are “tie-ins,” but when asked for details flatly refused to describe them. “Evi-dence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified, I cannot tell you


about evidence that has been gathered. It is classified information,” the source said.

Fox News has learned that one group of Israelis spotted in North Carolina recently is suspected of keeping an apartment in California to spy on a group of Arabs who the U.S. authorities are investigating for links to terrorism.

Numerous classified documents obtained by Fox News indicate that even prior to Sept. 11, as many as 140 other Israelis had been detained or arrested in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.

Investigators from numerous government agencies … detail hundreds of incidents …across the country that investigators say “may well be an organized intelligence-gathering activity.”

Documents say they “targeted” and penetrated military bases, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Federal Bureau of Inves-tigations, dozens of government facilities and even secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel.

A General Accounting Office investigation referred to Israel as Country A and said, “According to a U.S. Intelligence agency, the government of country A conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the U.S. of an U.S. ally.” A Defendant Intelli-gence report said Israel has a “voracious appetite for information. It aggressively collects military and industrial technology and the U.S. is a high priority target.” Futility of Exposing Corruption in Government Offices Tactics used to block efforts to expose corrupt government person-

nel take many forms and constitute standard practice. Take, for in-stance, the problems encountered by Jerry Van Hoorelbeke when he tried to expose corruption in the federal strike force in Los Angeles. He learned about these matters while he was involved in underworld activities.

Syndicated columnist Jack Anderson used Jerry Van’s information in a series of articles exposing the involvement of law enforcement per-sonnel in blocking prosecution of criminal activities. One of Ander-son’s articles (August 6, 1981) was titled “U.S. Investigates Its Own Troops In Crime War:”

Current and former members of the federal strike force in Los Angeles against organized crime are themselves under investiga-tion by the Justice Department. They have been accused of delay-ing or failing to pursue grand jury action against underworld fig-ures in California and Hawaii.


My associate Indy Badhwar has learned that the targets of the investigation are the current strike force chief, Jim Henderson, and his predecessor, Richard Crane, who is now in private law practice in Los Angeles. The investigation by the Justice Department’s Of-fice of Professional Responsibility was begun under pressure from Rep. Charles B. Rangel, chairman of the House Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control.

Over the past year, a special investigator for the House com-mittee has interviewed organized-crime figures and state and local law enforcers in California and elsewhere. His principal informant, however, has been Jerry Van, a self-described muscleman for Cali-fornia’s top racketeers and arsonists.

Van, now serving a prison term on extortion and assault charges, has been cooperating with state and federal authorities since 1979. Information he has given investigators, as well as his testimony before grand juries and in criminal trials, has led to al-most a dozen indictments and convictions for such crimes as mur-der, arson for profit, mail fraud and drug smuggling.

Federal and local lawmen describe Van as one of the most valu-able and credible witnesses against organized crime figures in more than a decade. Because of threats on his life, he is in the witness protection program while in prison.

Another Jack Anderson article in the Washington Post, titled,

“Government Put Informer In Jeopardy,” stated: When Van started to “sing” to a congressional committee about

alleged misconduct within the Justice Department, the feds put him in deadly jeopardy. He was abruptly withdrawn from the Justice Department’s witness protection program and turned loose among the general prison population, where he could have been easy prey for the mobsters he had helped to send up.

As I reported yesterday, Van’s charges against the federal or-ganized-crime strike force in Los Angeles led Rangel to ask Smith to investigate allegations of official corruption and dereliction of duty relating to narcotics enforcement in the Southwest ….” Van feels that he was betrayed by authorities who didn’t like his charges against their strike force colleagues. It took congressional pressure to get the Justice Department to investigate the charges after years of delay.

The House committee’s special investigator told my associate Indy Badhwar that he believes that Van was given a bad deal. Van received a punitive prison sentence after promises were made to in-


tercede for him in return for his cooperation. This is also the opin-ion of Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Corradini, who acknowledged the valuable help Van provided in breaking up the biggest, best or-ganized and most profitable arson ring in the country.

In January 1980, several federal agents testified in Van’s behalf at his pre-sentence hearing. Dennis Schloss, a Justice Department special prosecutor, testified that Van had been cooperating in fed-eral investigations of arson, mail fraud and white slavery. Van “gave full and complete information to the federal grand jury, Schloss told the judge, adding, “A very large percentage of that in-formation has been corroborated by independent investigative means.”

Although federal authorities used Van’s information in selected

criminal cases, they ignored his charges of corruption in government offices. This changed, at least partially, for cosmetic purposes, when the Jack Anderson articles appeared in national newspapers. Their appear-ance caused Congressman Charles Rangel, chairman of the Select Committee On Narcotics Abuse and Control, to write a letter to Attor-ney General William French Smith. Rangel wrote that Van provided information “concerning allegations of official corruption and derelic-tion of duty relating to narcotics enforcement in the southwest area of the United States.”

Rangel added: “Mr. Van’s allegations are directed specifically against the Los Angeles strike force, its former chief, Richard Crane, and its current leader, Jim Henderson. Crane’s supervisor of the strike force in Los Angeles for 13 years, resigned his position and went into private practice. When Crane’s clients have problems with the Los An-geles strike force [according to Van], they are rarely touched because the current chief, Jim Henderson, is a friend and former subordinate of Crane.”

Rangel urged the Justice Department to “undertake a vigorous in-vestigation” of the charges, as well as allegations involving Eddie Nash, a convicted felon who was Van’s boss. Though the allegations were first made in 1979-80, there were no indictments in the Nash case until 1983. “Mr. Van surmised the indictments only occurred when the strike force realized the House select committee was looking into the matter. Michael E. Shaheen, head of the Office of Professional Respon-sibility, replied with the standard and meaningless “we have initiated an inquiry into Mr. Van’s allegations.”

Through the Freedom Of Information Act, Jerry Van was able to get a copy of another letter Rangel wrote (November 15, 1983) to U.S.


Attorney General French Smith. The copy which Jerry Van received was heavily censored:

This Committee recently received information concerning alle-gations of official corruption and dereliction of duty related to Nar-cotics enforcement in the southwest area of the United States. This information was given to us by Jerry Vann, a California prisoner in the United States witness protection program.

After receiving these allegations, this Committee conducted a preliminary investigation to look into these allegations on behalf of the Select Committee, to determine if there was any substance to them. Mr. Vann’s allegations are directed specifically against the Los Angeles Crime Strike Force, its [head, James Henderson] and its [former head, Dick Crane] █████ (6)(7)(C) [two lines blacked out in letter]. According to Mr. Vann, he is the █████ for the Aladdin Hotel Casino and ███████ the Barbary Casino. █████ clients are organized crime figures. When ██████ cli-ents have problems with the Los Angeles Strike Force, they are rarely touched because ██████ friend and ███████. In addi-tion to these allegations, Mr. Vann described DEA “hand-to-hand” buys involving one ██████ in a case as far back as 1979-1980, with no indictment until 1983. Mr. Vann surmised the indictments only occurred when the Strike Force realized the House Select Committee was looking into the matter.

I bring this matter to your attention and strongly urge you to undertake a vigorous investigation. While it is not my intention to interfere with or involve this Committee with investigation allega-tions of misconduct by Federal officials, I have every confidence that the Justice Department will obviate the need to do so.

Finally, shortly after Mr. Vann made these allegations, and the resulting inquiry on the part of this Committee, he was transferred from protective custody into the general prison population. While I do not want to draw conclusions from this act, it raises certain questions, particularly what conditions have changed that would diminish the need for Mr. Vann to be under witness protection.

I again urge you to inquire into this matter and share with me, to the extent possible, the results of your inquiry.

Sincerely, Charles B. Rangel Chairman


Van provided me with some of the deleted information, including

that the former head of the strike force was Dick Crane and the subse-quent head, James Henderson. Van wrote that they were “fixing organ-ized crime cases for unsavory criminals who bought the federal gov-ernment law enforcement badge and used it as a credit card to purchase their way out of criminal indictments like drug smuggling, drug sales, murder, and finally, corruption.”

Van also wrote that after a year of doing nothing, “this matter was turned over to the notorious office of the OPR, who in turn quashed everything.” OPR is the office of professional responsibility, notorious for cover-ups of corruption in government.

Removed From Witness Protection Program After Exposing Strike Force Corruption Jerry Van was in prison when he first became a witness for the

government. His testimony resulted in the successful prosecution and imprisonment of many people. Because of his testimony he was segre-gated from the general prison population under the federal govern-ment’s witness protection program.

After Jerry Van started identifying corruption in the government’s task force itself, Justice Department personnel retaliated by removing him from protected custody and placing him into the general prison population. Simultaneously, they made known to the prison population that he was a government witness responsible for imprisonment of nu-merous inmates. Van explained this dangerous situation in one of his letters:

Because I exposed the federal Strike Force corruption I was taken off the program and cast in the middle of a prison compound where the feds put a snitch jacket on me, hoping someone would hurt me once the word spread. If it wasn’t for Rep. Charles Rangel’s quick response to the Attorney General, I could have very well been murdered and written off as just another prison murder that would have been written off as unrelated to Rangel’s inquiry into Los Angeles Strike Force corruption.

Anyway, to make a long story short, the federal government lap-dog agency, “Office of Professional Responsibility,” cleared the Strike Force from any wrongdoing—which is not uncommon for that agency to clear their own. Wall Street Journal Article Identified Task Force Misconduct A Wall Street Journal article (October 20, 1990) listed some of the

same people that Jerry Van had identified with the Los Angeles strike force:


As a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s office [In Los Angeles, Drew Pitt] immersed himself in the labyrinthine world of big-time securities fraud and the smooth-talking con men who populate it. He would rail against what he saw as legal loopholes that let crooks pick the public’s pockets.

Stock fraud, he once said, was like a “burning match”: The con men lit and passed around the overvalued shares until a victim gets burned.” Now, however, there are indications that in his journey through the world of swindlers, Mr. Pitt may have ended up in league with some of them. In July of last year, he was quietly sus-pended from his post as an assistant U.S. Attorney and put under investigation by a federal grand jury and the Justice Department’s internal-affairs office.

Discussions with dozens of other people and an examination of documents indicate that authorities are looking into whether Mr. Pitt abused his broad powers as a federal prosecutor to enrich him-self or protect certain people who were helping him do investiga-tions.

Stock-Promoter Network The stakes go beyond the fate of a single prosecutor. There is

growing evidence of widespread fraud in the sale of small-company stocks ranging from putting out false financial statements to bribing brokers to peddle shares to customers. At least four fed-eral grand juries around the U.S. have been investigation this. In his work, Mr. Pitt was in a position to plug into the network of suspect stock deals, promoters, and brokers. The key question for the Jus-tice Department is what role if any he took in that network beyond his authorized investigative one. In 1994, while still an active prosecutor, Mr. Pitt and his wife gained control of a publicly held company. Through it, Mr. Pitt did business with people he had been investigating, according to SEC filings by the company and people familiar with his work.

Former Mafia Member Helping Fight Terrorism by Becoming a Mole Inside al Qaeda Through my contact with Jerry Van I became acquainted with

Gregory Scarpa, Jr., a former member of the Colombo Mafia family in New York. Scarpa contacted me concerning writing a book about him, and in 2002, we signed a book contract. Scarpa then started sending me information about his relationship with the Mafia, and about his fa-ther’s relationship with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio. I describe this information in another book, FBI, CIA, the Mob, and


Treachery. Scarpa provided me with information pertaining to the mastermind

behind the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 and the hijack-ing of four airliners on September 11, 2001. Scarpa was confined in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York, waiting to stand trial on RICO charges while several of the terrorists were awaiting trial on the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Despite Scarpa’s or-ganized crime background, he worked with FBI personnel to obtain information about terrorist activities by befriending one of Osama bin Laden’s commanders, Ramzi Yousef. If properly acted upon, the infor-mation that was acquired during this period could have prevented some disasters that followed. Mastermind Behind 1993 Bombing of World Trade Center

Ramzi Yousef was the mastermind behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the planner for placing explosives on eleven U.S. airliners departing Far East locations, as well as the scheme to hi-jack U.S. airliners and fly them into major buildings.

After the 1993 WTC bombing, Yousef fled to Pakistan, then to Ma-nila, and then back to Pakistan. Police arrested him in February 1995 and he was extradited to the United States where he was held in the in the Manhattan Correctional Center (MCC), New York. Scarpa was also being held at the same location pending trial on organized crime activi-ties.

Scarpa was in daily contact with Yousef and in order to obtain in-formation on planned terrorist activities befriended Yousef and implied that his group was also planning terrorist activities against the govern-ment. Over a period of several months Scarpa obtained valuable infor-mation from Yousef, which he then reported to FBI agents.

The FBI reports containing Scarpa’s statements reveal that Yousef and his terrorists group were planning to hijack U.S. airliners (which did occur); to place a bomb at the Olympic activities in Atlanta, (which did occur); bomb U.S. Embassies in Africa (which did occur), and other terrorist activities. The FBI reports that I obtained from Scarpa and Hoorelbeke were dated from May 1996 through February 1997, and identified as file number 265A-NY-258172. Some excerpts follow:

Gregory Scarpa, Jr. was interviewed at Manhattan Correctional Center (MCC) at 159 Park Row, New York, New York. Scarpa was advised of the identity of the interviewing Agent and the nature of the interview. The terms of the interview related only to matters of terrorism and were defined at the beginning of the meeting. These terms were identical to the terms defined in the May 1, 1996 meet-ing held at the United States attorney office (USAO) Southern Dis-trict of New York (SDNY). Scarpa then provided the following in-


formation [This introduction appeared in every report, along with the date the information was obtained, the date the information was dictated, and the date of the transcript]:

[FBI report of interview with Scarpa on May 6, 1996] Scarpa transferred a hand-written note to SA ████████

Scarpa advised that the note was a second written copy of a note delivered by Scarpa to Yousef. The note conveyed that Scarpa was getting a telephone number for a company called ROMA to give to Yousef for overseas calls.

Scarpa also wrote that a fax number would be available to Yousef. The note also contained Yousef’s response, which was ob-tained verbally and subsequently written down by Scarpa. Yousef responded asking for the telephone number and questioning how he could use the fax.

Scarpa stated that there were many kites between Yousef and Marzouk. However, Marzouk was moved from his cell. After mov-ing Marzouk, there was much yelling in Arabic between Yousef and Murad

When questioned regarding the incident to take place within the next two to three weeks and the incident associated with the Olympics, Scarpa stated he believes these are two separate events and both will involve U.S. airliners. He believes that the first event may take place within the next week or two as approximately one week has already elapsed. Scarpa did not know through what chan-nels Yousef will receive the information. An individual, possibly Bojinka, is coming from England to Atlanta to check security measures at the Olympics. This person may already be in the United States.

[Note: TWA Flight 800 exploded on July 17, 1996, And a bomb went off at the Olympics as stated.] Scarpa stated that he will receive the details on the planned

events before they happen because Yousef wants Scarpa to “do something” to a U.S. government installation and wants the details prior to the event taking place. Scarpa expects to obtain the infor-mation regarding secreting bombs on airliners whether Yousef goes through with his plans or not. Scarpa stated that Yousef knows this information would be useful because Scarpa’s people only know how to “burn things” and “shoot people”. With this information they could eliminate witnesses.

Yousef originally was not going to give Scarpa the technique of secreting bombs if the plans were canceled, However, Yousef changed his mind when he received money into his commissary ac-


count, believing it to be from Scarpa. Scarpa also stated that Yousef has not been sending kites as much and has been more verbal be-cause he became paranoid when the Captain came into Scarpa’s cell.

Scarpa received the current bomb information on a note from Yousef. The note was written in Yousef’s handwriting. Scarpa wrote down the information from the note and returned the original to Yousef. Scarpa gave his written information to Silverman.

Scarpa stated that Yousef is still trying to confirm AUSA [U.S. Attorney] Michael Garcia’s address. Yousef gave Scarpa the ad-dress, which Yousef believes is Garcia’s address. Scarpa gave Yousef Garcia’s business address. Yousef believes that Scarpa is currently working to obtain Garcia’s home address.

Scarpa believes that Yousef has the right address but has not conveyed this information to Yousef at this time. Yousef stated that there is time to find the information because they plan to “hurt” Garcia possibly during the second trial to occur in September, Oc-tober, Or November to obtain a mistrial. Yousef’s people are to do the hit on Garcia while Scarpa’s people are to do the hit on SA David Williams. Yousef has not mentioned the hit on SA Williams recently because he felt better after getting the money.

Scarpa thought that Yousef was not using his paralegal any-more because he did not feel comfortable with this person. He thought Yousef had stopped using this person when Yousef arrived at MCC. Scarpa did not know the identity of this person. Scarpa did not know how Yousef gets his information out of MCC. He thought information was possibly transmitted through Ismoil’s uncle at one time.

Scarpa could not provide further information pertaining to Yousef’s sister or brother-in-law. Scarpa was then informed that the camera would be collected on May 6 or May 7, 1996. [This was the camera provided to Scarpa by the government.]

[FBI report of interview with Scarpa on May 9, 1996.] Scarpa transferred a handwritten note to Special Agent (SA)

██████. Scarpa advised that the note was written by Scarpa and was documentation of events taking place on May 7, 1996 and May 8, 1996. Scarpa stated that Yousef returned from court on May 7, 1996, and was very upset. Yousef stated that Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Michael Garcia was smirking during court. Yousef stated that Garcia has lost his life for sure.

Yousef has been asking to use the phone. Scarpa stated that the guards have been turning him down. Yousef mentioned that he needs to make a phone call to overseas to find out about the air-


plane situation. Yousef stated that his people are waiting for advice, but he’s concerned that they may go ahead with the plan even if he cannot contact them. Scarpa suggested to Yousef that he write a “cop-out” (a grievance) to Lieutenant Desman regarding use of the phone. Yousef stated if the Lieutenant does not resolve the problem he will have to take the issue to court.

[Iranian connection] Yousef stated that he had to use the phone prior to 10:00 a.m.

or after 9:30 p.m. because of the time difference in Iran. Scarpa suggested that arrangements be made to give Yousef recreation or phone calls on Saturday and Sunday and/or give Yousef phone privileges up to 11:00 p.m. Scarpa suggested the possibility of giv-ing Yousef recreation on the tier, however, the time difference may become an issue.

Scarpa received a handwritten note on May 8, 1996. Scarpa photographed the kite. The kite indicated that Murad is presently working with the prosecutors and the Federal Bureau of Investiga-tion (FBI). However, Yousef indicated that this was a plan and Mu-rad is not telling the prosecutors and the FBI the truth.

Scarpa stated that the information regarding the timing devices and explosives was received from Yousef. Scarpa rethought this is-sue and now is not sure if the kite was sent directly from Yousef or if the kite was sent from Murad through Yousef to Scarpa. [This re-lated to plans for placing bombs on U.S. airliners.]

Scarpa stated that the incident to take place within a week or two will be an airline bombing while the Atlanta incident will be a facility.

[Several weeks later, both planned bombings That Scarpa reported did in fact take place.] Scarpa was given the address of “Roma” by SA ██████.

Scarpa stated that Yousef would like to use the fax. Scarpa was questioned by Yousef when Scarpa transferred the phone number to “Roma”. Yousef questioned how Scarpa was able to receive the number when Scarpa does not have visits on that day. Scarpa stated that the number was given to Silverman in a sealed envelope and Silverman delivered it to Scarpa.

[FBI Report of Interview With Scarpa on May 16, 1996] Scarpa transferred three (3) handwritten notes to Special Agent

(SA █████. Scarpa advised that two of the notes were written by Scarpa, and one (1) note was written by Yousef. The first note was a handwritten note by Scarpa pertaining to the events taking place on the evening of May 13, 1996. Scarpa stated that Yousef was dis-


cussing Shah and how Shah got arrested. Yousef told Scarpa that Shah was arrested because a friend of Shah’s gave him up to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Yousef stated that this same person is going to turn over more names soon. Yousef said he sent a coded message to Bojinga and informed Bojinga of this person living in Qatar.

[Qatar was where U.S. forces were later stationed.] Yousef believes that this person will be killed soon. Yousef

stated that this person was informing on Shah and that the FBI told him to find out Shah’s location. This person pretended to be bring-ing money to Shah to give up his location. Yousef stated that this person was not recruited by the FBI at first, it was another intelli-gence agency. This person was recruited from a club in his country where he used to hang out. Yousef stated that once Bojinga gets this coded message, he is sure that this person will “lose his head.”

Yousef suggested to Bojinga to kidnap and torture this person before killing him to find out the names and addresses of the people who recruited him so they can be killed also. Yousef also suggested attacking the U.S. Embassy in Qatar, or another one in another country if it is easier. Yousef said that this would be a way to pun-ish the U.S. for participating in the arrest of Shah. Yousef said the person who gave up Shah was paid a lot of money and is living like a king.

Scarpa asked Yousef if he had received word regarding the air-line situation. Yousef stated that Scarpa should know why Yousef has not. Scarpa interpreted this to mean Yousef has not been able to use the phone. Yousef stated that as soon as Yousef knows what is going on, Yousef will tell Scarpa. Yousef wants to know where, when, and how Scarpa is going to perform his terrorist act on a government installation. Scarpa told Yousef that things would be easier if Yousef would give Scarpa the method to get bombs thor-ough security. Yousef replied, “Soon.”

[This was a plan by Scarpa to learn how the bombing would occur so that he could pass this information to his FBI han-dlers.] The second note was a handwritten note by Scarpa pertaining

to the events taking place on May 14, 1996. Scarpa stated that Yousef believes if he can “get rid” of a few witnesses on his case, he can easily win. Yousef is waiting for confirmation from his law-yer about a certain professor that Yousef knows. If this professor is going to be a witness, Yousef said he can easily be killed. Yousef heard about the witness in court the other day and said that the wit-ness might be someone else. Yousef stated that his people are short


on funds and they have to decide who they want to kill. Scarpa felt that Yousef was hinting about Scarpa killing SA Williams. Scarpa told Yousef that his people are working on killing Williams. Yousef said, “Good”.

Yousef later told Scarpa that he was writing a kite to indicate what the people at “Roma” should say if the FBI or anyone else questions them. Scarpa advised the kite was handwritten by Yousef on May 14, 1996. Scarpa transferred the kite to SA █████. Yousef wanted to thank “Roma” for giving him the number to call overseas. Yousef stated that he was not able to use the number yet because he could not get the time. Yousef stated that he appreciates the help in getting in touch with his parents and wants to pay it back when he can. Yousef wants Scarpa to explain Yousef’s situa-tion and the charges against him. Yousef does not want “Roma” to be considered a co-conspirator and to get hurt trying to help Yousef.

Scarpa stated that Lieutenant Desman told Yousef on May 15, 1996, that they are working on the phones to make it easier to call out. Yousef stated that he needs the phone for 9:30. Lieutenant Desman told Yousef to put it in writing. Scarpa advised that Yousef requested phone use on Tuesday, May 14, 1996 and Wednesday May 15, 1996, and that he wants to use the tier phone. Scarpa stated that there are now nine (9) people on the tier. Scarpa stated that everyone gets phone privileges during their recreation time, but Yousef does not get his recreation on the tier.

Scarpa stated that he thinks Yousef may have a feeling some-thing is going to happen but does not have contact right now to know for sure.

Scarpa thinks that Yousef may think he will win his first trial so he is waiting until the second trial to “hurt” Assistant United States Attorney Michael Garcia.

[FBI report of interview with Scarpa on May 28, 1996] Scarpa advised that the notes regarding bomb smuggling were

copies from a note from Yousef. However, Scarpa attempts to detail all of his notes to exactly what is said or what has happened so there are no misunderstandings. Scarpa stated that at times Yousef holds notes up for Scarpa to read from his cell. Scarpa and Yousef can see each other through holes in the walls where beds were bolted. These beds have been removed and the holes were never fixed.

[Olympic Bombing] Scarpa transferred a handwritten note to the interviewing


Agent. Scarpa advised that the note was written by Scarpa and de-tailed the events of Thursday, May 23, 1996 and Friday, May 24, 1996. On Thursday, May 23rd, Scarpa asked Yousef if Yousef’s friends in New York are the same people looking at the security at the Atlanta Games. Yousef told Scarpa that the people going to At-lanta are not the same.

The Atlanta people are coming from England and Yousef stated that this information was already given to Scarpa. Scarpa questions Yousef about the relationship between Yousef and the person who calls himself Bojinga (not the real Bojinga). Yousef did not seem to give Scarpa a straight answer. Yousef stated that he was doing legal work and would talk to Scarpa later at approximately 9:00 p.m. Yousef stated that he was going to pray, eat, and go to sleep.

[Hoax Bomb Threats] On Friday, May 24, 1996, Scarpa advised that Yousef was up-

set that nothing has happened with SA Dave Williams. Scarpa ad-vised Yousef that the person working on the Williams’ contract was arrested on drug charges with some of the people who were sup-posed to do the hit. Scarpa asked Yousef if there was something else they could do for him. Yousef stated that he wants Scarpa’s people to call in three bomb threats to United Airlines international flights on three separate occasions within one week. The purpose is to cause disturbance and fear among people flying airplanes and it would cause financial problems for the airline.

Yousef stated that he wants to know when the calls will be made because Yousef’s people will do three additional threats after Scarpa does his three threats. Yousef wants the threats to be made a few hours after departure to cause the airline to turn around and land. Yousef wants the blame to be placed on a militia group on be-half of the Freeman for how the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is handling the situation. Scarpa said it would take a couple of weeks for the plan to go into effect. Yousef stated that if Scarpa’s people fail at this to never speak with Yousef again.

Yousef also stated that the airline people should be contacted instead of the airline office because the airline people will react faster. Yousef also said that Scarpa’s people should not leave fin-gerprints and make the bomb threats from a street phone. Yousef said he needs ten days to get a message to his people and another ten days to get the act done. Yousef stated that the people in Atlanta will do the threats. Yousef said they will do the threats three weeks from now. Yousef indicated that one of the two people in Atlanta speaks with an American accent and can give credit to the Freeman militia. Yousef advised that these two people are in Atlanta this


week. On Monday, May 27, 1996, Scarpa wrote down suggestions.

Scarpa suggested to rotate cells next Friday (May 31st) and wrote the cell numbers suggested for each inmate. Scarpa wants to devise a plot against a government installation to tell Yousef about. Scarpa wants to buy time on the airline threats by having a new plan to tell Yousef.

Scarpa had no knowledge that Roma’s phone number had been given to Murad or Ismoil.

Scarpa had no further information regarding Garcia, the Olym-pics, the jurors or the witness.

Scarpa had not been asked by Yousef about the money. Scarpa was advised by the interviewing Agent of a plan if Yousef questions about the $2,500.00. Scarpa was advised to tell Yousef that the de-livery of the money looks too suspicious and that Scarpa has al-ready provided an overseas line through ROMA which is costing a lot of money. A meeting was suggested between one of Yousef’s people and one of Scarpa’s people (FBI) on the outside.

Scarpa began to flip through his own paperwork, which in-cluded photocopies of his own notes. The interviewing Agent asked if she could see these documents. Scarpa gave additional docu-ments to the interviewing Agent

[FBI report on interview with Scarpa on June 11, 1996] Scarpa transferred a handwritten note to the interviewing

Agent. Scarpa advised that the note was written by himself. The note relayed the following information:

On May 29, 1996, Scarpa was talking with Murad regarding the ongoing trial. Murad told Scarpa that Yousef believes that Scarpa can find out information on jurors. Scarpa questioned whether Yousef is trying for a mistrial.

[Predicting Explosion of TWA Flight 800] Scarpa told Murad that an airplane explosion would be a “good

thing to happen” especially if Yousef’s people claim responsibility. Murad responded that it is going to happen and they are checking to see if Bojinga received the message.

[A month later, on July 17, 1996, TWA Flight 800 exploded, shortly after departing New York. The Olympics bombing also occurred.] On June 3, 1996, Yousef repeated that he was upset with

Scarpa for the money situation. On June 5, 1996, Scarpa confronted Yousef about Murad and


Ismoil’s use of the “Roma” phone. Scarpa also repeated that he is not going to send any money into a federal prison. Scarpa again suggested an outside meeting. Yousef asked Scarpa about the bomb threats. Scarpa responded that bomb threats would hurt his organi-zation. Yousef again talked of money. Scarpa reminded Yousef that he has provided Yousef with overseas calls and money.

[Eyed Ismoil was the Jersey City resident who drove the truck containing explosives to the World Trade Center garage in 1993. Murad was a co-conspirator in that bombing.] Scarpa advised that cells were rotated on Thursday evening

June 5, 1996. Scarpa remained in the cell he was already in, in the corner of the left hand side when looking into the tier. Yousef was moved adjacent to Scarpa and Ismoil was moved adjacent to Yousef. Murad was moved across from Scarpa into the last cell on the right hand side.

On June 6, 1996, Yousef confronted Scarpa saying that the way things have been going Yousef said he’s beginning to “smell FBI”. Yousef said he is always giving and gets nothing in return. Scarpa became very upset and threatened Yousef. Yousef told Scarpa that he was only making a comparison between the way the FBI han-dles things and the way Scarpa handles things. Yousef stated that if you are dealing with the FBI, you keep giving information and the FBI never does anything in return. Scarpa responded that the information that Yousef gave him was just given to his people and in time they will use it.

Yousef suggested to Scarpa that he send $500 to Yousef into his commissary account and send the remaining $2,000 to an address overseas. Scarpa told Yousef that he would have to check with his people. Scarpa then questioned Yousef again about Murad and Is-moil using the “Roma” phone. Yousef said that his idea of having Murad and Ismoil using the phone was to “mix messages in.” Scarpa told Yousef if it’s important, all three can use the phone.[Roma Phone was a phone provided by the FBI.]

Scarpa wrote a few suggestions regarding the money. Scarpa asked whether he should tell Yousef no because his people do not want to get caught up into a conspiracy or give Yousef $500.00 for commissary. Scarpa told Yousef he would get an answer by Mon-day or Tuesday of Next week, June 17 or June 18.

On June 10, 1996, Scarpa spoke with Ismoil. Ismoil stated that Yousef does not think Scarpa is as serious as he used to be. Ismoil told Scarpa to hold on because Ismoil said Yousef has plans that he has not discussed with Scarpa yet.


[Getting information on trial jurors.] The information Scarpa received regarding the jurors was the

number of children they each have, whether they are married or single, what religion they are, what type of work they do, and what county they live in. [What was the purpose of getting this informa-tion?]

Ismoil mentioned to Scarpa the other day that they plan to kid-nap a prosecutor, a judge, or a United States Ambassador and that they are planning on getting out of jail whether they win or lose. Scarpa stated that Yousef knows information about Drews, the Guard. Yousef knows that Drews rides a motorcycle to and from work. Scarpa does not know whether Yousef overhead this information or if he receives information from the outside.

Scarpa advised that Yousef told him that Yousef either sent or received a coded message by phone. He felt that was done on May 16, 1996.

[FBI Report Of Conversation With Scarpa On July 1, 1996] Scarpa transferred one (1) handwritten note to Special Agent

(SA) ██████. Scarpa advised that the note was written by Scarpa and pertained to the events taking place on June 29 and June 30, 1996.

[Bombing of U.S. military barracks in Saudi Arabia] Scarpa advised that on June 29th, he asked Yousef how he is

sure that Bojinga actually did the bombing in Saudi Arabia. Yousef responded that he was sure because Yousef was originally sent on the mission to check out the security measures and that a tanker truck was discussed at that time.

[The Saudi Arabia bombing was the bombing of the Khobar Towers on June 25, 1996, in Dhahran, that killed 19 people and in-jured approximately 500 others.] Bojinga was the code name given by the Yousef group to the planned placement of explosives on 11 U.S. airliners departing Far East locations.]

Yousef expressed concern regarding bugs in the cell. Yousef said if the government hears him talk about the bombing they might introduce the information at his trial. Yousef stated that he is concerned that something is wrong because his fathers account number was never received and his paralegal has not received the $500 that was sent out six weeks ago. Yousef indicated to Scarpa that Yousef knows more details about the bombing but is paranoid that the government is listening to him.

Scarpa advised that Yousef indicated that he would be able to identify the bombers when the composites drawings are completed


and printed in the newspaper. Yousef did not want to talk too much in the cell because he feels that his present case is strong. Yousef was happy because a witness in his case said that the government told him to lie. Scarpa mentioned that the government asked the witness to indicate that a briefcase was found in a hall instead of where it was actually found. Scarpa also mentioned that items were taken which were not in the search warrant.

On the evening of June 30th, Yousef received a visit from his paralegal. When Yousef returned to his cell, he was yelling to Ma-raud in Arabic and sounded as if he were upset about something. Scarpa asked Yousef if everything was OK.

[FBI Report of Interview With Scarpa: July 18, 1996] Scarpa transferred two (2) handwritten notes to Special Agent

(SA) ███████. Scarpa advised that one note was written by Yousef and one note was written by Scarpa. In the note written by Yousef to Scarpa on July 6, 1996.

[Iranian Contacts] Yousef advised Scarpa that he had spoken with his sister and

she stated that she needs money because to visit him with her kids. She asked Scarpa for $2,000. Yousef advised that he is waiting for his sister to send him her father’s bank account number. Yousef ad-vised that he was going to talk with her about the DHL situation but was told to get off the phone by the officer. Yousef stated that he did not have a chance to talk to his sister about sending letters through DHL. Yousef then told Scarpa that Iran does not have DHL service.

The note written by Scarpa pertained to the events taking place on July 6 and July 11, 1996. On July 6th, Scarpa was talking with Murad who stated that he feels that they will win the trial but either way they will be freed from jail. Murad asked Scarpa why his friends have not helped him escape from jail. Scarpa advised Mu-rad that these tactics do not work in the United States. Murad re-sponded that if the right person were kidnapped, a U.S. Ambassa-dor or someone of that level, and demands were made, that the United States would meet their demands. Murad told Scarpa “just wait and see.” Scarpa asked Murad to let him know when they make their plan.

On July 11th, Yousef advised Scarpa that when he speaks on the phone and needs to get a message out, he speaks in three languages. Yousef also advised that his friends are coming from Atlanta soon and that they have a plan. Yousef advised that he would let Scarpa know.

Scarpa advised the interviewing Agent of the desired cell loca-


tions for rotation. Scarpa advised that he spent $18 total for com-missary for Yousef and will soon be buying flowers for Maqda for becoming an lawyer.

[Warning not to fly TWA on Morning of July 18, 1996] Scarpa advised that Jerry Koupakis (spelled phonetically) told

Scarpa that he told his father not to travel TWA or American Air-lines on the morning of July 18th. Koupakis advised that Yousef had told him this information prior to July 18th. [Jerry Koupakis was a former U.S. Custom agent that went bad. TWA Flight 800 exploded on the evening of July 17, 1996.]

Yousef told Scarpa not to speak with Murad because he feels that the cells are bugged. Yousef told Scarpa that he was going to get out in a couple of days because he was “half way done with the window.” According to Scarpa, Yousef stated this to see if the cells are bugged.

The following night, Raia came to the tier at 3:00 am and was seen by Ismoil. Scarpa advised that Murad and Yousef have been conversing often in Arabic.

[FBI report of talk with Scarpa on December 26, 1996.] Starting with the FBI reports of interviews with Scarpa on De-

cember 26, 1996, the first paragraph identified Gregory Scarpa, Jr. as a “Confidential Source (CS)” and identified throughout the body of the report as “CS.”

CS transferred three (3) pages of handwritten notes to the interviewing Agent. CS advised that the notes were self-written. The first two pages pertained to the events taking place on De-cember 18, 1996. CS asked Yousef to reveal the address that the passports were to be sent. Yousef responded that he will not give out the address until he finds out whether CS’ associates will send them or not. CS questioned Yousef whether the address is located in the United States. Yousef responded that the address is an Iranian address. CS asked whether Yousef was having the passports sent to his parents address. Yousef responded “No”, and that a temporary address was set up in Iran for this purpose.

[It is interesting that Iran and Iranians were involved with these plans, which President Bush conveniently ignored as he fo-cused his peculiar ire on Iraq, ignoring the role that Iranians played in the terrorist acts.] CS questioned Yousef how he sends and receives his messages.

Yousef responded that he would reveal his method in a few weeks. Yousef told CS that “You’ll be real surprised” and “You’ll be shocked,” Yousef said for his own reasons he cannot tell his


method yet. [Encouraging Yousef to Reveal Terrorist Plans] CS advised that, prior to meeting with the interviewing Agent

on December 18, 1996, he had a conversation with Yousef regard-ing co-operating witnesses on the L-unit. Yousef was curious as to what kind of deals the Government makes with the witnesses. CS explained that it depends on the information obtained and how well the witness does at trial. CS told Yousef that he should make a deal with the Government. CS advised that Yousef should give up Bo-jinga or Bin Laden. Yousef responded that the Government would never go after Bin Laden because the Government knows that within one week of capturing Bin Laden twelve U.S. airplanes would be blown up.

CS advised that Yousef’s locker is kept on L-unit away from Yousef’s cell. This locker contains his cosmetics, which are not al-lowed in his cell in case he is capable of making a bomb from them. An item, which was not further identified, was discovered to be missing from the locker. CS advised the interviewing Agent that this item was placed, by Yousef, on the ledge of his cell and fell to the floor down the stairway to the floor of the unit below. Yousef advised a guard that the item had fallen and was told that the item would be retrieved. The item apparently was never retrieved and the item was detected missing.

[Insider Assistance] A search was conducted of Yousef’s cell. During the search, a

thick, heavy, foot-long slab of glass was found hidden under Yousef’s bed. As a result of the find, Yousef received a shot. Yousef advised CS that he identified CS as a witness to the fact that the glass was in his cell prior to Yousef’s occupancy. CS advised the interviewing Agent that the glass was not in the cell previously. CS questioned Yousef how he obtained the glass. Yousef smiled and stated that he received it from his connection. CS questions Yousef as to how he intended to use the glass. Yousef responded that he had some ideas but did not elaborate on the ideas. Yousef then stated, “Watch what I get the next time.”

[Hostage Crisis in Peru] The last note pertained to the events taking place on December

21, 1996. CS had heard a news radio report regarding the crisis in Peru and was relaying the news report to Yousef. CS told Yousef that the U.S. is agreeing to do all that they can so that none of the hostages get hurt. However, the U.S. Government hopes that the Peruvian Government does not give into the demands of the terror-ists because it is U.S. policy to never give in to the demands of the


terrorists, especially to release prisoners. Yousef stated that the guerillas in Peru are too easily releasing

hostages and showing the Government that they are weak. Yousef told CS about a hijacked plane in Pakistan. Yousef stated that the Government hesitated and did not immediately do as the hijackers wanted and the hijackers blew themselves and the plane up imme-diately. Yousef stated that this way is the way of himself and Bo-jinga.

[FBI report of Jan. 15, 1997, conversation with Scarpa] The first note was a kite written by Yousef and received by CS

on Thursday, January 9th. Yousef told CS that “Flesiano & Maldando stopped taking the sleeping pills” which Yousef used to give to CS to give to them. Yousef revealed that he would give the pills to CS and the other inmates to put them to sleep so that they would not see his contact when he came to see Yousef. Since the Government found the glass in Yousef’s cell, Yousef believes that the “Feds” started thinking that Yousef may have a contact within MCC who brought Yousef the glass.

Yousef believes that “Flesiano & Maldando” have been asked by the Government to watch Yousef to see who, if any, of the MCC staff comes to the L-unit that normally does not belong. Yousef stated that these two inmates stopped taking the sleeping pills and are up all night.

Yousef also has a strong feeling that “Flesiano” was put on the tier to watch Yousef because he was originally on another for months where he was safe. Yousef feels there was no reason to bring “Flesiano” to L-unit unless it was to spy on Yousef. Yousef has decided to poison “Flesiano.” Yousef has decided to make some poisons and pass the food to the two inmates. Yousef stated that it will take approximately ten days to two weeks for the poison to kill the inmates.

[Terrorist’s Radio Transmitter in Federal Prison?] The second note pertained to the events taking place on Friday,

January 10th and Sunday, January 12th. On the night of January 10th, CS advised that, while out on the tier, Yousef called him to his cell and showed him what appeared to be an electronic board. Yousef advised that he would talk to CS about the board “later”.

Yousef was sleeping by the time CS returned to his cell. On the night of January 12th, Yousef revealed that the electronic board was his way of sending and receiving messages. Yousef informed CS that the board is equipped with a booster, F.M. mike, and other things he could not recall. Yousef advised that he has a “gas


lighter” which he used for soldering. Yousef revealed that he has received his last message and “everything is a go.” Yousef stated that he will not transmit another message until two months from now. The message will be sent to Yousef’s people and will relay that he is “ready”.

Yousef is in the process of breaking the transmitter down into components. Yousef will give the components to CS to divide be-tween Murad, Shah, and Ismoil. Yousef told CS to keep the gas lighter himself but not to get caught with it. Yousef wants the com-ponents back in two months to reassemble the transmitter and relay that he is ready. If Yousef’s people do not receive a message from him, they will tell Bojinga that Yousef is not ready yet. Yousef told CS to tell Murad, Shah, and Ismoil only to dispose of the compo-nents in an emergency. Yousef revealed that if the components are disposed of, he will have his contact bring the additional equipment he needs.

CS questioned Yousef about the identity of his contact. Yousef stated that he would not reveal who his contact is to anyone, in-cluding Murad, Shah, or Ismal. Yousef did indicate that he has not seen his contact in some time and hopes that everything is all right by him. Yousef then asked CS what radio station he was tuned to and showed CS how the system worked by transmitting Yousef’s voice across CS’s radio. Yousef stated that his messages were sent by a code similar to Morse code.

CS advised the interviewing Agent that he believes the person to whom Yousef transmits is in New York.

In addition, CS advised that John Napoli, one of the coopera-tors on the tier, was up until 2 a.m. speaking with Murad. CS be-lieves that Napoli is forming a friendship with the terrorists. How-ever, CS has also advised that Napoli is interested in working for the Government. Lastly, CS advised that Yousef knows the ad-dresses of CS’s mother and his daughter, Kori.

[FBI agent report of Feb 7, 1997, Information provided by Scarpa.] CS advised that at the end of the previous week, the guards on

L-unit began to discuss moving Yousef, Murad, Shah, and Ismoil, to the secure cells recently constructed. These cells are known to have cameras in each room monitoring the inmates 24 hours each day. Last Sunday, February 2nd, the guards stated that they were getting the keys to the new cells and were saying their good-byes.

Upon hearing of the upcoming move, Yousef asked CS to get the pieces of the transmitter back to him. CS advised that the com-ponents included wires, a gas lighter, a little “mike” with wires,


plastic and metal pieces, and a green circuit board approximately 2” x 2”. CS was having difficulty retrieving the pieces as he was under constant surveillance by the guards. On Tuesday, February 4th, Yousef told CS, Murad, Shah, and Ismoil to dispose of any other components they may still have. Yousef advised that he would get his message out another way.

[Using Walkman to Transmit to Yousef’s Associates] CS advised that he believes that Yousef was using his “walk-

man” as a transmitter. Yousef gave CS a “Cup o’ Soup” container through a guard. Yousef told CS to open the bottom of the con-tainer. The container was found to have a false bottom and con-tained the gas lighter. Yousef had disguised the container to look like it had never been opened.

CS advised that he had received a kite from Yousef on Monday night, February 3rd. The kite was given to CS’s lawyer, Larry Silverman. The kite contained information that Yousef had tested CS’s loyalty throughout the year. Yousef stated that he had asked CS for money as a precaution, knowing that the Government would never supply money for this purpose.

CS advised that Yousef received a visit from the Iman last Tuesday, February 4, 1997.

The government did supply money for this purpose: $500 and $2000; Inman was … [The continuing page is not available.]

Providing Information on Corruption in Government In a letter I received from Gregory Scarpa, Jr. (August 27, 2002),

he added additional information to what Van had conveyed to me. Scarpa wrote:

My information will consist of how and when the FBI and high-ranking members of the Colombo Crime Family in New York worked together and eventually caused an internal war in the crime family. The member was my father Gregory Scarpa, Sr. and also myself, Gregory Scarpa, Jr. Because of numerous murders and then numerous indictments a big cover-up ensued.

This relationship headed by Supervisory Agent R. Lindley De-Vecchio, Gregory Sr. and Gregory Jr. began approximately 1979. But Gregory Sr. was on both sides (FBI and Mobster) for three decades going back to 1963. Before DeVecchio the other head agent was Mr.[Anthony] Villano.

My information consists of not only ignored day to day crimi-nal activities, the FBI agents assisted in the Mafia killers’ success. Much of this I have documentation which also includes giving


Scarpa the names of other FBI snitches so Scarpa could put them in harms way while shielding his own illegal operations. Telling us where the FBI was placing wire taps so we can avoid them, hand-ing over the addresses of Scarpa’s enemies in the Colombo Crime Family war so that Sr. could track them down and kill them. Fabri-cating evidence against Vic Orena and other Scarpa adversaries so they would be sent to prison. Also, involvement with being a look-out while me, my father and others would burglarize banks while they were closed for the weekends. I have so much more informa-tion that goes way back to the 60s. Interesting Contradictions in the Scarpa Crime Group In 1964, Gregory Scarpa, Sr. helped find the murderers of three

civil rights workers killed in Mississippi in 1964. The FBI sought help from Gregory Scarpa, Sr., to find the murderers and reportedly pro-vided him with a pistol to be used if needed.

The FBI reportedly gave the name of one of the local Ku Klux Klan members to Scarpa and gave him authority to do whatever was necessary to find the three missing civil rights workers. Scarpa, Sr., was rising in the Colombo crime family and was more than willing to carry out the FBI’s attempt to find the murderers of the three civil rights ac-tivists.

According to one report, Scarpa and his girlfriend flew to Miami, registered at the Fontainebleau Hotel, and then were driven by FBI agents to the Mississippi town of Philadelphia.

FBI agents told Scarpa the Klan member most likely to cave in and disclose the fate of the three civil rights workers. That Klan member operated an appliance store. Scarpa placed a deposit on a television set with the Klan member and then said he would be back that evening with the balance. Upon his return that evening, Scarpa asked the Klan member to help carry the television set to the car. As the Klan member bent over to put the television set in the car, Scarpa hit him in the back of the head with an iron pipe, shoved him into the trunk, and drove off to a remote location. Scarpa shoved a pistol into his mouth and told him to reveal where the civil rights workers were located or the trigger would be pulled. The Klan member than took Scarpa to the burial spot.

Seven men were subsequently indicted for the killings, including the deputy sheriff of the small town of Philadelphia, Mississippi. The discovery of the bodies then led to expansion of the Civil Rights Act.

Gregory Scarpa, Sr., died in June 1994 from the AIDS virus, which he had contracted during a transfusion with HIV tainted blood during an operation for ulcers in 1986. Scarpa filed a lawsuit against the Brooklyn hospital and doctor that were responsible and a financial set-


tlement was reached in August 1992. It was reportedly $200,000 to be paid by the hospital and $100,000 by the surgeon; a paltry amount compared to the millions in judgments awarded on so-called sexual harassment slights.

Long Standing Practice of Using Organized Crime Groups U.S. leaders, the FBI, presidents, have repeatedly used organized

crime figures to carry out certain operations. The CIA turned to mob-ster John Roselli to attempt to kill Cuba’s Fidel Castro; used Charles Luciano for help when U.S. troops invaded Italy; and worked with mob figures in the CIA’s drug smuggling. Long Line of Evidence of Criminality by FBI Personnel

I had repeatedly seen the felony cover-ups by FBI personnel, start-ing while I was a federal air safety agent. But this was nothing com-pared to the involvement by FBI personnel in murders. For years my CIA contacts described FBI involvement in assassinations, but I never repeated these charges as I felt the public would not believe it.

Deep cover CIA agents Michael Riconosciuto and Gunther Russ-bacher were two of those who named the FBI agents and FBI infor-mants who committed murders. However, with the publicity surround-ing the FBI’s long history of aiding and abetting murders perpetrated by Boston’s Winter Hill gang, headed by James (Whitey) Bulger, that were publicized in the Boston papers and shown during a criminal trial against FBI agent John Connolly, credibility was given to my earlier sources. Connolly was sentenced in September 2002 to ten years in prison. Most of the nation’s media gave the FBI’s culture very little attention.

Same FBI Practice in New York City Additional credibility to this FBI practice was given by Gregory

Scarpa, Jr., who described the decades of FBI sanctioned murders start-ing with his father, Gregory Scarpa, Sr.

An FBI culture that aids and abets murders, that permits innocent people to go to prison, would certainly breed the standard culture of false charges, exaggerated charges, use of perjured testimony, and other crimes. In many cases these crimes are far worse than those perpetrated by people in federal prison. A person can question whether the crimes by government personnel, who are in a position of trust, are worse crimes than those performed by non-government personnel who do not hold this position of trust in government.

FBI Protection of Drug Trafficking and Other Crimes In my various books—and books written by other former govern-

ment agents—the cover-up by FBI personnel of major crimes implicat-ing government officials were covered up. These included, for instance,


drug smuggling by the CIA, drug smuggling operations involved in the Contra operations, and many others. Soft-Glove Criticism of the FBI

During the kid-glove investigation of events that made possible the success of the 9/11 hijackers, considerable media and congressional attention was paid to FBI agent Coleen Rowley who had written a letter to the joint congressional committee investigating the terrorist attacks complaining about her frustration and roadblocks within the FBI. Al-most any competent government investigator in any government agency could report similar problems, which I certainly discovered.

While giving the complaint of intangible frustrations considerable publicity, no publicity had been given to the years of insider complaints of hardcore corruption in the FBI, in the FAA, and other government offices. Giving these vague and relatively innocent matters attention probably is intended to show responsiveness by these checks and bal-ances.

FBI Director’s Dark Past Former FBI Special Agent Richard Taus described the role played

by FBI Director Mueller in the Winter Hill organized crime activities in Boston, with FBI involvement in numerous murders and assassinations. Taus wrote (August 23, 2002):

Getting back to FBI Director Mueller. He’s implicated in the Boston FBI cover-up and trial of former FBI agent John Connolly back in May-June 2002. [Is this the correct year?] Mueller was the acting US Lawyer in Boston when the FBI covered up for Mafia and other mobsters, most notably Whitey Bugler.

Because of former acting US lawyer Mueller involvement, the Boston police department stated that the FBI has for more than 30 years protected the mobsters and stymied their (BPD) investiga-tions. The Boston FBI case is similar to my case with the Supervis-ing FBI SA R. Lindley DeVecchio who covered for Mafia Capo Gregory Scarpa. I Also Discovered Mueller’s Cover-Ups Mueller also covered up for the criminal activities that I brought to

the attention of FBI agents in the San Francisco office while Mueller was in charge of that office. Mueller also refused to respond to the cer-tified letters that I sent to him in that San Francisco position, after he became director of the FBI prior to September 11, 2001, and the certi-fied letters that I sent to him after the success of 19 hijackers on that date. This is described in Defrauding America and Drugging America.

Mueller Cover-Up in BCCI Scandal A Wall Street Journal editorial (May 31, 2002) stated of FBI Direc-


tor Mueller: Prior to his appointment [to FBI director], we raised questions about his handling of the BCCI scandal while he was head of the Criminal Division in the early 1990s. In [the New York U.S. Attor-ney’s] attempts to prosecute the case, the Manhattan district attor-ney felt the same kind of frustration with main Justice that Agent Rowley now feels about FBI headquarters. His appointment, we wrote, put the Bureau “in the hands of someone who will turn over no rocks and rock no boats.” [This is euphemism for cover-up.] Kickback to Informant During Mueller’s tenure in the San Francisco U.S. Attorney’s office

it was revealed that a U.S. Customs agent took a $4,000 kickback from an informant and that a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s office with-held this information from the defense. Despite this background of cover-ups, U.S. Attorney General Ashcroft was quoted in that same Wall Street Journal editorial:

Mr. Ashcroft this week praised him as a “battle-tested leader” And the “right man for the job.” The director could relieve their embar-rassment by completing this week’s mea culpa with an honorable resignation. Another FBI Cover-Up Related to Terrorism While in prison on a battery offense charge, former FBI Special

Agent Richard Taus was in contact with a Pakistani, Mian Farooq, who was a former Pakistani Air Force Captain flying the A-10 Warthog, a plane still used by the U.S. military. He was also a former Pakistani Intelligence Officer and former CIA contract agent.

Farooq had known the hijacker responsible for the entire operation on September 11, 2001; Mohamed Atta! Taus and the Pakistani, Farooq, were both in New York state prison at Dannemora; Farooq on a family abuse charge.

Within two hours of the televised events on September 11, 2001, before any of the hijackers were identified, the Pakistani told Taus that he knew who some of the terrorists were. Taus explained in letters to me:

Farooq said that in 1996 he met Mohamed Atta at JFK Interna-tional Airport dressed in an airline captain’s uniform. He knew Atta and asked him why he was so dressed and Atta replied that he owned a flight school operation in Florida. His story about his ac-quaintance with Atta indicated he was very friendly with Atta. Re-peatedly, prior to the 9/11 disaster, he often mentioned that we


Americans do not know the depths of hatred and ill feelings toward us by Middle Easterners.

He was indeed expecting something to happen. Prior to 9/11, he approached me to contact trusted FBI agents to give his story, but it was not until the 9/11 tragedy that he finally spoke about some of his knowledge. He felt it could and should have been pre-vented, though he said there would be terrorist attacks.

In short, working for the CIA, he knew that attacks were being planned and he was stunned when 9/11 occurred, saying to me, that it was Mohamed Atta and his associates that did the awful deed.

I immediately notified prison officials as to the value of this in-formation and they were cooperative. I said I would contact my law enforcement friends on the outside, since NYS DOCS was unsure about how to handle the information.

My friends, such as NYPD Captain Rudy Blaum, spoke directly to the FBI New York Field Office on everything and requested FBINYO to interview the Pakistani and me. It was not until after the first national alert of another pending attack [weeks later] that two “county-club” agents finally interviewed me. They were arro-gant, uninterested and ill prepared for the interview. In fact, when they later interviewed the Pakistani, the Pakistani said they were incompetent! They knew nothing about terrorist or foreign counter-intelligence work!

[FBI Halted Information on Terrorist Plans] He then refused to give them any further information,

especially after they tried to disparage me. (That I deeply resented since I served this nation in war and peace with honor and courage. I found the Pakistani to be more honorable and respectful of me than the incompetent FBI agents who knew of my military and FBI service!)

[CIA Handler Warned Him Not to Disclose Knowledge] Later, within a week, probably in late September or early Octo-

ber 2001, the CIA agent that handles the Pakistani came here and warned him not to say anything to anyone. Again in confidence, he told me about their implied threats to him.

After the second national alert, probably in October or Novem-ber 2001, the Pakistani again shared some information, asking me to see if the FBI would do anything. With no response from FBI Headquarters, the Pakistani decided to wait until something posi-tive happened with his own criminal appeal. Finally, when FBI SA Rowley spoke out, the Pakistani asked me to arrange an interview with her. Again, I advised prison officials who let me proceed, mail-ing her information and phoning her. I explained to Rowley that she


should call the Superintendent and fax them reasons why she wanted to interview the Pakistani, which was exactly what I was told to do by prison officials here.

The Pakistani says he has not heard from Rowley. I feel the rea-son is that CIA is claiming a working relationship with him, whether former CIA agent or source, and thereby preventing the FBI from interviewing him, a sort of “gentlemen’s agreement” on using informants.

There is no doubt that his revelations would also confirm the information I had told the FBI about, as long ago as 1986(!), that the FBI was not paying any attention to their investigative duties and responsibilities. Herein is the FBI complacency, if not complic-ity in these terrible events. As I often said the FBI is deliberately ill equipped, under-trained, and disinterested in doing its most impor-tant investigations. Even FBI Director Mueller commented on the shambles of archaic and assorted computer equipment that the Bu-reau is still using.

From my experience, the FBI has been set up to be ineffective in doing its FCI and counter-terrorism tasks. And the FBI’s failure to address the information from the Pakistani and me, in a timely fashion and with proper resources (interviewers) proves this real conspiracy against all Americans who rely upon their law enforce-ment efforts. (I could easily get into the many other minor cases that the FBI pursues, but I will bite my tongue for now.

The United States government is more concerned about who gave the Iraqi the NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) capacity. Isn’t it the same government that supplied both sides in the Iranian-Iraqi War with weapons! Now it is all coming back to haunt U.S. intelligence, just as CIA-trained Osama bin-Laden has done. When the U.S. government engages and works with criminals, psycho-paths and evil men, we can expect the worse. Blocking Report on Terrorist Activities from Atta’s Friend Taus described how he had sent Rowley a 40-page report describ-

ing what the Pakistani was willing to tell her or any other FBI agent. She was complaining about the non-responsiveness of the FBI, and here she was non-responsive to some of the most valuable information about the 19 hijackers and their organization.

Taus wrote, “I believe he has been truthful and that he knows much more, but is fearful of CIA reprisals.” Taus included details about what he had earlier discovered about terrorist activities while head of an FBI investigative group, about his discovery of the funding and arming of


Iraq through the U.S. Department of Agriculture loan guarantee pro-gram, and the CIA-drug smuggling, among other corruption in key government offices.

Speculation as to Refusal to Obtain Terrorist Information I can only speculate as to the reasons the FBI did not contact the

Pakistani for his information. He was a key source, a friend of Atta, a former Pakistani pilot, an intelligence officer in Pakistan. A gold mine of information like this is not turned down by any intelligence agent who seeks valuable and timely intelligence from an insider. Refusal to obtain the Pakistani’s information could be due to (1) focusing attention on how the FBI silenced Taus when Taus was exposing CIA drug smuggling, (2) unlawful funding and arming of Iraq by the Reagan-Bush administrations; (3) incompetence; or (4) some unknown factor tied in with corrupt covert activities of America’s “leaders.”

FBI Indifference to Information From Atta’s Close Friend Taus wrote in an earlier letter:

He and I, separately, have been interviewed by FBI agents from the Plattsburgh Resident Agency Office of the FBI. FBI SAs Steven Weisknopf and Thomas Longerhan were not interested in hearing our stories. They conducted the interviews only because there was another national alert and the FBI already had egg-on-its-face from the 9/11 WTC tragedy.

Farooq was also interviewed by a CIA agent here who, in the past, told him to “clam-up,” otherwise the CIA would not help him with his appeal. I told him that if the CIA were going to do anything to help him, he would have already been out on bail. For whatever reason, the CIA let him go through the trial, although he possesses sensitive information on the terrorist investigations.

Finally, after the abortive interviews and lack of any relief for him from the CIA or anyone else, he said he would speak to FBI SA Coleen Rowley, and only her. [Rowley was the FBI whistleblower that was given widespread media attention for sending a letter to the media complaining about FBI inaction—something known for decades.]

I should also note that prison authorities have been very coop-erative with me since this information affects Homeland Security. One of Many Warnings of Expected Airliner Hijacking Discovering that a group intended to hijack one or more airliners is

dicey at best. If the group maintained strict secrecy, it would be im-probable that their plans would be discovered. In the case of terrorists planning to hijack airliners and crash them into buildings, this informa-tion was repeatedly acquired from different sources.


“FBI Confirms It Issued Hijack Alert” stated the heading on a Wall Street Journal article (June 7, 2004):

In response to a Wall Street Journal article Friday, FBI officials confirmed that in at least one alert, the bureau provided the Federal Aviation Administration and other agencies with a detailed sum-mary of allegations made by would-be hijacker Niaz Khan, a Briton of Pakistani descent who had turned himself in to U.S. au-thorities. But the alert, which warned agencies to be on lookout for such a hijacking for the following weeks, expired and Mr. Khan, was soon returned to the United Kingdom, where he was released.

Disclosure of the FBI’s alert lends additional credibility to the story Mr. Khan has told in recent weeks of his induction into a ter-rorist group and subsequent dealings with U.S. and British law en-forcement.

Khan said in a recent interview that he was recruited by Islamic radicals in the U.K. and trained to hijack airplanes at a school in Pakistan before being sent to New York in early 2000 to await or-ders. After turning himself in to police, he was extensively de-briefed by the FBI and passed two polygraph examinations. The bureau’s concerns were great enough that it did issue one or two alerts, according to two FBI officials and others familiar with the matter. The warnings gave a detailed description of Mr. Khan’s claims, they added.

DOJ Prison Officials Blocked Scarpa’s Letters to Me Prison officials at the maximum-security prison at Florence, Colo-

rado suddenly blocked Scarpa from sending me information. Scarpa had signed an agreement with me to write a book on his story, the rela-tionship of him, his father, and the Colombo Mafia family with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio. The information being provided to me by Scarpa Jr. exposed murderous corruption by DeVecchio and FBI officials who knew and authorized the crimes.

Since DOJ personnel blocked Scarpa from providing me any addi-tional information for the book, Scarpa’s daughter asked me to rescind the book agreement, which I did.

Futile Attempts to Report the Criminal Activities to Congress For years, as I personally discovered while a federal agent, and

then later as many other government agents provided me with informa-tion about criminal activities in government offices or covert govern-ment operations, I tried to report the crimes to members of Congress. Every time, they refused to receive the information or even to respond. It was no different when I sought to report the criminal activities in the


FBI’s New York offices, based upon what Scarpa, Van Hoorelbeke, and former FBI agent Richard Taus told me. Not a single member of Con-gress to whom I sent the letters in 2003 responded.

Then, in 2006, a courageous state district attorney in Brooklyn filed criminal charges against former FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley De-Vecchio.

My Prior Attempts to Report Criminal Activities I had reported DeVecchio’s misconduct in the first edition of De-

frauding America that came out in 1994 and even reported to members of Congress, including the Judiciary Committee members, and also made reference to the FBI corruption in federal court filings. But my many attempts to have people in government (or the media) receive my evidence failed. Possibly too many major criminal activities were in-volved, including too many people in different areas of government; no one would receive my evidence, or even reply to my letters.

Starting a Book Project with Gregory Scarpa Jr. In May 2002, Gregory Scarpa, Jr. in federal prison at Florence,

Colorado, contacted me with a request that I write a book on his story. His August 27, 2002, letter stated:

A friend of mine [Gerald Van Hoorelbeke] here at the U.S.P. Max informed me that you wrote him saying you would consider writing a book for me if I could provide you with a general outline of information that I possess.

My information will consist on how and when the FGI and high-ranking members of the Colombo Crime Family in New York worked together and eventually caused an internal war in the crime family. The member was my father Gregory Scarpa, Sr. and also myself, Gregory Scarpa, Jr. Because of numerous murders and then numerous indictments a big cover-up ensued.

This relationship headed by Supervisory Agent R. Lindley De-Vecchio, Greg Sr. and Grey Jr. began approximately 1979. But Greg Sr. was on both sides (FBI & Mobster) for three decades go-ing back to 1963—before DeVecchio. The other head agent was Mr. Vallone.

My information consists of not only ignored Scarpa’s day–to-day criminal activities, the FBI agents assisted in the Mafia killers’ success. Much of this I have documentation which also includes giving Scarpa the names of other FBI snitches, so Scarpa could put them in harms way while shielding his own illegal operations, tell-ing us where the FBI was placing wire taps so we can avoid them, handing over the address of Scarpa’s enemies in the Colombo Crime Family War so that Sr. cold track them down and kill them. Fabricating evidence against Vic Orena and other Scarpa adver-


saries so they would be sent to prison. Also involvement with being a lookout while me, my father and

others would burglarize banks while they were closed for the week-ends. I have much more info that goes way back to the 60s.

Most Mafia books seem to have went well. I can’t see a book with the Mafia and FBI as partners until the cover-up ensued go wrong. But with your expertise you know better than I. I am also not sure if we can use their real names.

Being that I’m in prison and if you are interested, all the legal issues of writing a book, deal for a movie or TV, I would go with my daughter as for signing contracts or whatever,

Sincerely, Gregory Scarpa, Jr.

I accepted, and we signed a contract (October 15, 2002) whereby I

would write a book on his life with the Colombo mafia family and its relationship with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio.

Among the many things he told me was how he kept the books for the Colombo family, how he had the task of putting money aside every week to pay DeVecchio, and to provide for the FBI agent periodic hotel rooms, champagne, and call girls. He provided me with considerable documentation to support his statements. In a February 19, 2003, letter, Scarpa wrote:

I’m enclosing what I have of FBI DeVecchio’s limited testimony at my trial, also Scarpa issue motions from attorney James Froc-caro who represented at the time a co-defendant of mine and the other motion from my court-appointed attorney, which at the be-ginning was very good until the government got to him. I’m also sending you an affirmation prepared by attorney Flora Edwards for the Committee on Government Reform. These documents will have information for you to log as well as some answers to a few of your questions of Set One—areas to consider.

At the moment I am working on the questions Set One, as I complete some answers I’ll send it to you.

Sincerely,

Greg


DOJ Prison Officials Blocked Scarpa From Revealing Further FBI Involvement After I received certain information from Scarpa Jr. describing the

murders in which FBI Supervisory Agent DeVecchio had participated in with Scarpa Sr. and Jr., prison officials confiscated mail he tried to send me. In a June 22, 2003, letter, Scarpa wrote:

Rodney, numerous letters and informative documents that I sent you, for one reason or another, are returned to me, either” I’m not allowed to say this,” or” Not allowed to say that.” Reason Why DOJ Prison Officials Blocked Scarpa’s Letters The most probable reason that DOJ prison officials blocked Scarpa

from revealing his knowledge of prior Mafia activities to me was that FBI agents were involved in criminal activities with the Mafia, and par-ticularly Gregory Scarpa Sr. and Jr.

Besides the information that I received from Scarpa, a fellow in-mate with Scarpa, Jerry Van Hoorelbeke, provided me with information that he had obtained from Scarpa. Hoorelbeke was a former mobster who was a confidant to Jimmy Hoffa and socialized with various Las Vegas and Los Angeles mobsters. These included Tony Spilotro, the mobster depicted in Casino, and Eddie Nash, the mobster charged with ordering the Hollywood” four-on-the-floor” murders. He wrote a book titled, Underworld Secrets: Hoffa to Las Vegas, which I helped him to get published.

Attempting to Report FBI Criminal Activities to Congress After Scarpa Jr. provided me with information about the role

played by FBI agents in the murder of government informants, and af-ter this pattern was exposed in the Boston FBI offices in the late 1990s, I sought to report the cumulative information I had acquired about FBI corruption in the New York offices to members of Congress, including the office of government reform.

This information showed that the criminal activities of FBI agents in the Boston office were not limited solely to that office, but also in the far larger FBI offices in New York.

The cumulative information included what Scarpa conveyed to me; what Hoorelbeke stated, and what former FBI Special Agent Richard Taus had conveyed to me. In addition, I had years of experience with FBI cover-ups, starting while I was a federal agent in the Federal Avia-tion Administration.

I obviously couldn’t report the criminal activities to the corrupted FBI or any other division of the Department of Justice. I sent letters to Congressman Tom Davis, chairman of the Committee On Government Reform. Those letters were especially timely. The committee was con-


ducting hearings on the FBI’s criminal involvement with organized crime in the Boston area, the necessity of which was brought about by heavy media reporting in the Boston-area newspapers.

Standard Tactic of Damage Control Rather than focus its attention on the criminal aspects of the FBI

misconduct, which included the complicity of former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and other Washington officials in the Department of Jus-tice, members of the congressional committee on government reform focused on the FBI’s use of informants. That wasn’t the problem; the problem was the criminal involvement of FBI personnel.

A copy of the first letter to Congressman Tom Davis (July 4, 2003) is shown here: From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Websites:www.defraudingamerica.comwww.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com

July 4, 2003 Representative Tom Davis, Chairman Committee on Government Reform 2157 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Certified: 7002 0860 0003 9592 6405

Ref: Former government agent with information on FBI misconduct in New York City offices similar to that in Boston office in the Bulger mat-ter.

To Representative Davis and the committee on government reform: For the record, I am making the following statements that raise responsibili-ties under federal law, including the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4): • I am a former federal agent;1 a veteran in the aviation field;2 an investiga-

tor for many years; a confidant to many other government agents, and ac-tivist against corruption in government. I have acquired a great amount of information on criminal activities implicating certain government person-nel that enabled the infliction of great and irreparable harm upon national interests and the lives of many people. This pattern will continue until cer-tain people—such as you and members of your commission—meet their legal responsibilities, including those under federal criminal statutes.

As it relates to Deep-Seated FBI Culture of Corruption: • As it relates to FBI misconduct, which is the area of your present limited

investigation into FBI misconduct in Boston with the Bulger crime group,


I have acquired information3 showing that the subject of your Boston hearings is not limited to the Boston area. For instance: o FBI agents in the New York City area were providing confidential in-

formation on government informants to certain members of the New York crime families, and the government informants were subse-quently murdered. This information was given to me in writing by a former member of one of those crime groups. The Justice Depart-ment’s Bureau of Prisons has recently blocked that insider from pro-viding me, an investigator and author, with additional information that would have been used to promote national interests.

o Cover-up by various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice when I, as a federal air safety agent, attempted to report criminal ac-tivities that I discovered in my official duties that played, and contin-ues to play, a major role in a series of fatal airline crashes. This is the same type of misconduct, and cover-up, that caused the conditions to exist that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners, when the pre-ventative measures were known, were authorized to be taken, were required to be taken, and were not taken. The key issue here is the deep-seated pattern of corruption implicating key people in the gov-ernment’s aviation safety offices, a problem that will continue until exposed and meaningful corrective actions taken. The present tactic to keep this matter from the public is to place the blame for 9-11 on the more innocent” intelligence failures.”

o FBI retaliation against a veteran FBI agent (and holder of several medals for bravery in Vietnam) when he continued to report drug-related and other criminal activities of CIA and other government personnel in the New York City area.

o Repeated charges of criminal contempt of court against me, by Justice Department prosecutors, when I filed federal actions under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4)4 and 28 U.S.C. § 1361, seek-ing to report the corruption in the government aviation safety offices (and in other offices that I and a group of other former and present government agents had discovered).

As it relates to decades of aviation disasters—including 9/11: • As a federal aviation safety agent I discovered, documented, and at-

tempted to report deadly misconduct in key government aviation safety offices that caused or enabled numerous major aviation disasters to occur.5

• Among the most recent aviation disasters made possible by this docu-mented misconduct were the hijackings of four airliners by 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001. I and other federal aviation safety agents had re-ported, years earlier, the need for FAA management to order the simple and inexpensive preventative measures that would halt the decades of fatal hijackings.

• Why, and how, the authority and responsibility to act on these (and many other crash-related) aviation tragedies occurred opens the window on un-derstanding, and taking corrective actions, on the corruption in govern-ment that continues to spread like a cancer.


• The complicity by those who knew of these crimes, and either did nothing or who actively covered up, would be another aspect of the 9-11 tragedies.

Documented complicity of federal judges: • Felony cover-ups and obstruction of justice by large numbers of federal

judges to block the reporting of these criminal and subversive activities. This documented misconduct includes, for instance: o Repeated refusal by federal judges to receive evidence of criminal

and subversive activities from present and former government agents, under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4). The federal crimes, which we initially sought to expose, related to aviation disas-ters, and eventually, the misconduct that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on 9-11.

o My attempts to comply with this important crime reporting statute commenced in the late 1970s6 and continues to the present time.7 In every instance, federal judges blocked the reports, obstructing justice, making possible the continuation of the conduct resulting in the 3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001.

o Repeated refusal to receive evidence of other criminal activities im-plicating people acting in government positions. These include, for instance, drug smuggling into the United States by people acting in government positions and the cover-ups and obstruction of justice by others who knew of these federal crimes. (These other criminal activi-ties are detailed in the books that I have written in collaboration with a group of other former and present government agents).

o Seeking to block these reports of criminal and subversive activities, federal judges issued a series of orders permanently barring me ac-cess to the federal district and appellate courts. Simultaneously, legal schemes were initiated to corruptly strip me of the $10 million in real estate assets that funded my public-spirited exposure activities. These unlawful, unconstitutional, and felonious8 orders permanently barring me access to federal courts also show the willingness of federal judges to not only obstruct justice but also to subvert the laws and constitution of the United States relating to civil rights.

o Repeatedly charged me with criminal contempt of court for attempt-ing to report criminal and subversive activities, including those that made the events of 9-11 possible. In addition to the obstruction of jus-tice crimes, this retaliation violated other criminal statutes.9

Most recent judicial obstruction of justice includes: • Federal judges refusal to file papers submitted to the U.S. district court,

Southern District of New York, which concurrently blocked the reporting by former federal agents of criminal and subversive activities, including those primarily responsible for the conditions that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners and kill 3,000 people. This filing was accompanied with the filing fee and all required documents, and sought to report crimi-nal activities that I and other former government agents had discovered as part of our official duties. By this judicial obstruction of justice, the pri-


mary blame for the events of 9-11 are being withheld from the people, the guilty are being protected against prosecution, and the conditions enabling the events of 9-11, and many prior tragedies, remain in place.

• Refusal of judges in the district and appellate courts in Washington, DC to receive information from government insiders of criminal activities that enabled, for instance, the events of 9-11 to occur, and which, as in prior judicial obstruction of justice, enabled the federal crimes to continue that resulted in prior tragedies. This relates to the federal filing seeking to re-port the criminal and subversive activities, the sua sponte dismissal, and the aiding and abetting by appellate judges in the District of Columbia.

• There is much more information on corruption in government offices that I and my group of other former government and present government agents discovered. The continuation of these criminal activities was made possible by the cover-ups (obstruction of justice) by members of the House and Senate. Their complicity insures continued cover-ups and con-tinued obstruction of justice. With the continued cover-ups by the broadcast and print media that keeps

the public uninformed, combined with public indifference and cowardly state of denial, the guilty will remain unpunished and the tragedies made possible by the corruption will continue as before.


Footnotes:

1. As a Federal Aviation Administration air carrier operations inspector I was given the task to correct the conditions causing the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history. In this position I acted as an independent prosecutor, con-ducted a six-month-long hearing, and developed a transcript that further proved my charges of corruption within the FAA that made possible a number of prevent-able aviation disasters.

2. I joined the U.S. Navy in 1940. I was a multi-engine patrol plane commander (PPC) during World War II. I was captain for several international airlines after World War II. Throughout this period I was a flight instructor. I was an FAA in-spector-investigator for a number of years. I wrote numerous books on misconduct that I discovered and have appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows in the United States, Canada, Mexico and Europe.

3. Information on FBI/Justice Department corruption has been acquired over many years from my personal experiences as a government agent, as an activist, and from my many FBI, CIA and other government sources.

4. The clear and specific wording of the federal crime reporting statute says: Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual com-mission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

5. These fraud-related aviation disasters are detailed in my documentary book, Un-friendly Skies.


6. Initial attempts to report criminal activities included the following lawsuits: Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and mis-conduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsifi-cation of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety mis-conduct, making possible repeated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litiga-tion, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. De-partment of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other ac-tions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air dis-aster misconduct.

7. Federal filing in the U.S. district court, Washington, DC (1-02CV01172), which was sua sponte dismissed by judge Henry H. Kennedy immediately after filing on the basis that in 1991 U.S. district judge Stanley Sporkin rendered an unlawful and unconstitutional order permanently barring me access to the federal courts. That action sought to report criminal and subversive activities to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4). Sporkin blocked my attempt to report these federal crimes. If not blocked, the evidence would have enabled ac-tions to be taken that would have blocked the actions of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001, and many other offenses against national interests and national security. Following my appeal (02-5240) of that unlawful dismissal, district of Columbia judges (Ginsburg, Edwards, Sentelle, Henderson, Randolph, Rogers, Tatel, and Garland) rendered an order filed March 26, 2003, upholding the district court’s blocking of the reports of federal crimes related to 9-11, and the order perma-nently depriving a former federal agent of his civil and constitutional rights guar-anteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States.

a. In addition, federal judges blocked a similar filing submitted to the U.S. district court for the Southern District of New York that was submitted on August 8, 2002, along with the filing fees and all required papers. Letters to the court, including chief judge Michael Mukasey, showed the filing was blocked, but not rejected. By these unlawful acts—and many not stated here—these judges are covering up for people involved in criminal and subversive activities, including those that enabled 19 hi-jackers to seize four airliners on 9-11, Their obstruction of justice—as in prior judicial obstruction of justice—will enable the continuation of fraud-related tragedies upon the United States and its people.

8. The judicial orders, and judicial and Justice Department retaliation, blocking pre-sent and former federal agents from reporting criminal and subversive activities, enabled major criminal activities to go unreported, to continue, and for the result-ing harm America and its people to continue. These judicial acts are felonies.

9. Felonies arising from retaliating against a former federal agent and witness for seeking to report criminal and subversive activities are based upon, for instance, Title 18 U.S.C. § 111. Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or em-ployees. (a) In general.–Whoever– (1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 114 of this title [federal agent] while engaged in or on account of the performance of official du-ties; or (2) forcibly assaults or intimidates any person who formerly served as a

Continuing FBI-DOJ Cultural Problems 279person designated in section 1114 on account of the performance of official duties during such person’s term of service, shall, where the acts in violation of this sec-tion constitute only simply assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and in all other cases, be fined under this title or impris-oned not more than three years, or both. a. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an infor-

mant──(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading con-duct toward another person, with intent to ── (1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding: shall be fined... or im-prisoned... or both. [1988 amended reading]

b. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily in-jury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for──(1) the at-tendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or pos-sible commission of a Federal offense...

After receiving a non-responsive letter from Congressman Davis, I

sent him a second letter on October 23, 2003:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America; Drugging America; Unfriendly Skies; Blowback, 9-11, Lies, and Cover-Ups; Terrorism Against America; Lawyers and Judges—American Trojan Horses Member: Association Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) Lawyers Pilots Bar Association International Society of Air Safety Investigators (ISASI) E-mail: [email protected] Google.com search engine:” Rodney Stich” Web sites: www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.blow911.com www.terrorism-against-america.com

October 23, 2003 Representative Tom Davis, Chairman Committee on Government Reform 2157 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515-6143

Ref: Response to your letter relating to my offer to provide information provided relating to murders committed in New York area by organized crime with complicity of FBI agents

To Representative Davis: Your October 16, 2003, letter stated that the commission investigating FBI misconduct is bringing its investigation into FBI misconduct to a close, and that you would keep my letter on file. The information that I offered to you was information provided to me by a New York City crime-family insider on the relationship between a key Mafia


figure and FBI agents. This information related to how FBI agents provided information on government informants to a member of one of the New York City’s crime families the subsequent murders of the informants based upon the FBI insider information. Your letter stated:

I am in receipt of your materials regarding FBI misconduct in New York City and circumstances surrounding September 11, 2001. The Committee is currently bring-ing its investigation into the misconduct in the use of FBI informants to a close. However, I will keep your letter on file and contact you should additional informa-tion be needed.

It is interesting to see that the 40 years of recorded cover-ups by members of Congress hasn’t changed one iota. I first started documenting this practice—and the resulting grave consequences—while I was a key federal aviation safety inspector-investigator, which included acting as an independent counsel, linking the relationship of deep-seated misconduct in the government’s avia-tion safety offices with numerous airline disasters. I also offered to provide you and your committee with information and documentation on corruption that I and other former government agents had discovered that had a far greater role in the successful hijackings of four air-liners than the limited issues being addressed. An ordinary person could reach the decision that a former federal agent, who acted as an independent counsel in the FAA, who has over 60 years of unusual aviation background, and who has reams of government documents to support his charges, might receive something more than a brush-off. You and other members of Congress have legislated draconian prison sen-tences for people who promptly fail to report a criminal act. Here, government insiders are offering you evidence of murders committed with the help of FBI agents (similar to what happened in Boston with the Winter Hill gang), and evidence of existing conditions that made the events of 9-11 possible—and which continue to exist. Based upon my official findings as a government agent, and the informa-tion provided to me by dozens of other former and present government agents on corruption by people in key government positions, I repeatedly attempted to provide the information and evidence to members of Congress. These efforts were pursuant to the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4) and the responsibilities of member of Congress to receive such information. Several admitted the gravity of what I said, but none was responsive to his or her moral and legal responsibilities. The consequences of such cover-ups include the seizure of four airliners on 9-11, but those were only one-day’s consequences and in only one area of national security adversely affected. Several things keep people like you in office and protected against prosecu-tion for misprision of felonies: the cancerous growth of corruption in govern-ment offices, the cover-ups by most of the media, and the pathetic apathy by the American people.



I sent an additional letter to Congressman Davis advising him of

the actions by DOJ’s prison officials blocking my source, Gregory Scarpa, Jr., from providing me information on the FBI’s criminal activi-ties. From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America; Drugging America; Unfriendly Skies; Blowback, 9-11, Lies, and Cover-Ups; Terrorism Against America; Lawyers and Judges—American Trojan Horses Member: Association Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) Lawyers Pilots Bar Association E-mail: [email protected] Google.com search engine:” Rodney Stich” Web sites: www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com

October 27, 2003

Representative Tom Davis, Chairman Committee on Government Reform 2157 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515-6143

Ref: Supplement to my October 23, 2003, letter concerning FBI agents acting with Mafia figures in murders, as it relates to Justice Department personnel blocking former organized crime figure from providing infor-mation concerning these criminal activities

To Representative Davis, After I sent to you the last letter dated October 23, 2003, I received in the mail a letter from the warden of the federal prison at Florence, Colorado, re-vealing his continued intent to block a former crime figure, who is incarcer-ated at Florence, from providing me details on the links between FBI agents in the New York City area, organized crime, and their role in a series of murders. The murders resulted from FBI agents providing the names of government informants to crime figures. Attached is a copy of Warden Robert Hood’s October 20, 2003, letter, showing his continued intent to block communications. Although he cited a shotgun list of reasons, common sense shows intent to block the exposure of criminal activities by Justice Department personnel relating to the crimes by FBI agents working with organized crime figures, relating to the murders of U.S. citizens. The gravity of this information would be to show the culture of corruption within the FBI, the inability to correct this through cover-ups, and the effect of such culture in the FBI and Justice Department on national secu-rity. As I stated in my last letter to you, in response to your letter, your cavalier decision not to pursue this information reflects what I documented for the past 30 years, the absolute 100 percent cover-up (obstruction of justice) that I en-countered, starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent uncovering


deep-seated corruption by people in the government’s aviation safety offices. For 30 years a series of déjà vu aviation disasters were made possible by the corruption and the cover-ups. The events of 9-11 were only the latest one-day’s consequences of this corruption, in only one area of national interests ad-versely affected by the combination of misconduct. This is a grave matter with dire consequences for the security of the United States. I am requesting that you intervene with the Justice Department to halt the block to the communications between certain inmates and myself that has is blocking the exposure of these crimes against the United States. Also, please send me whatever reports your committee has and will re-lease on the hearing into the FBI conduct with organized crime in the Boston area that implicated Washington FBI personnel.


Despite the gravity of the matter, the effect upon national security

and other major national issues, Congressman Davis never responded to these last two letters.

I contacted another member of the committee, Congressman Henry Waxman, seeking a copy of a report by the committee and also notify-ing him that I had a source that could prove that the committee’s hear-ings on the FBI misconduct in Boston also existed in the FBI’s New York offices. From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Current print and E-books: Defrauding America; Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies, Ter-rorism Against America; Lawyers and Judges—American Trojan Horses Association Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators (ISASI) Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot E-mail: [email protected] Internet search engine:” Rodney Stich” Web sites: www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com July 1, 2003 Representative Henry Waxman House Government Reform Committee House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Ref: Request copy of Congressional hearing transcript on date of testi-mony of William Bulger, believed to be on or about June 19, 2003. To Representative Waxman:


This is a request for the transcript of hearings related to the congressional hearings on matters relating to the FBI activities in Boston, and especially the date of the hearing obtaining testimony from William Bulger. I am a former federal agent, an investigator with many contacts among government agents, and an author and investigator relating to misconduct in government offices—including within the various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice. For your information, among the many sources that I have acquired over the years since becoming an activist, is a former member of the Colombo Crime Family. He has provided me with information showing similar activities between FBI agents and organized crime in the New York City area, particu-larly as it relates to FBI agents revealing the identities of government infor-mants to organized crime figures, followed by the murder of these revealed informants. I include some of this continuing influx of information in my latest book, Terrorism Against America—from Inside and Outside.


These letters offered to provide the names of the Mafia figure—

Scarpa Jr., who I did not name in the letters, and people close to the figure who would also have information. True to form, not a single re-cipient responded, allowing the serious charges to go uninvestigated, and assuming the criminal activities still existed, allowing them to con-tinue avoiding justice.

Information for Murder Indictment Assisted by Information Provided by Scarpa Jr. To a Book Author A New York Post article (April 3, 2006) stated that author Sandra

Harmon was writing a book with Gregory Scarpa Jr. and that the infor-mation she obtained from Gregory Jr. helped Brooklyn prosecutors ob-tain the 2006 murder indictment against retired FBI agent DeVecchio. Details concerning this matter, and what Gregory Scarpa, Jr. told me several years earlier, are found in my book, FBI, CIA, the Mob, and Treachery.

My book contract with Scarpa from 2002 had to be rescinded when DOJ prison officials blocked Scarpa from sending me information that exposed corruption in the FBI. Since DOJ prison officials blocked me from getting additional information for the book, I signed a release on the book contract with Scarpa after his daughter, Kori Eagle, asked for it.


All Terrorists Found Guilty As the trial ended in New York City, Ramzi Yousef, Wali Khan

Amin Shah and Abdul Hakim Murad were found guilty in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. The mastermind of the bombing, Ramzi Yousef, was sentenced to life in prison on May 16, 1998, along with Murad and the others. Missing from the group involved in the 1993 trade center bombing was Abdul Rahman Yasin, who still had not been arrested. Not charged were those officials in government who blocked government agents from performing their duties.

Jury Finds Gregory Scarpa, Jr. Guilty Scarpa was convicted of the RICO charges in October 1998. While

Scarpa was waiting to go to trial, during the time that he was providing information to the FBI about Yousef’s plans, Scarpa’s attorney had ar-ranged with FBI officials that they would recommend to the judge, if Scarpa was found guilty, a downward departure from whatever prison sentence arose from Scarpa’s trial. This process was authorized by Fed-eral Rules of Criminal Procedures 5K1.1.

Betrayal by FBI Personnel The downward departure recommendation that federal prosecutors

had promised Scarpa for his work with the terrorists was rescinded by the DOJ prosecutors. They claimed that the information provided by Scarpa was a hoax, unreliable, and that Scarpa was not creditable.

U.S. District Judge Reena Raggi agreed with the federal prosecu-tors and held that the confidential information Scarpa obtained from inside the terrorist cell responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the bombing of a Philippine Airlines aircraft, the planned bombing of 11 U.S. airlines, and involvement in the 9/11 attacks, was not reliable and a hoax. Therefore, Scarpa did not merit a downward departure in the length of prison sentence.

Among the FBI memos that Raggi had to ignore was the following FBI 502, referring to what Scarpa relayed to the FBI:

Yousef told Scarpa I’ll teach you how to blow up airplanes and how to make bombs and then you can get the information to your people. Yousef told Scarpa I can show you how to get a bomb on an airplane through a metal detector. Yousef told Scarpa he would teach him how to make a simple time device. Yousef told Scarpa that during the trial they had a plan to blow up a plane and hurt a judge or an attorney so a mistrial will be declared. “Important” Reasons for Denying Scarpa’s Credibility There were several important self-serving reasons—for FBI offi-

cials and federal judges—to label Scarpa as not creditable, despite the


overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In my FBI book I describe the criminal activities of FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio, the details of which were known to Gregory Scarpa, Jr. If Scarpa were held to be creditable on the information he obtained from the terrorists, his testimony about the criminal activities of DeVecchio would be found to be also creditable. Also, as described in earlier pages, the withholding of terrorist plans that facilitated numerous terrorist attacks upon U.S. interests.

Giving Scarpa credibility would reveal murderous activities of not only FBI agent DeVecchio but of his superiors in New York and Wash-ington who knew of these activities for years. This in turn would constitute a defense for several mobsters awaiting trial, and result in voiding certain prior convictions. It would also be a defense for what Scarpa Jr. was doing, with the approval of DeVecchio. It was therefore necessary to discredit anything that Scarpa Jr. stated, despite the adverse consequences upon national security and facilitating further terrorist attacks upon the United States.

Deception Relating to Scarpa Expanded to Threats Against Scarpa’s Mother and the Female Friend to Gregory Scarpa, Sr. The girlfriend of Gregory Scarpa Sr. was listed as a defense wit-

ness. She would testify with details of Scarpa Sr.’s relationship with FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio. Scarpa Jr.’s mother also intended to testify in similar fashion. Their testimony would bolster the serious charges against FBI agent DeVecchio and the FBI and DOJ of-ficials in Washington that approved the criminal acts of Scarpa Sr. and Jr.

DOJ prosecutors told these two witnesses that they would be prose-cuted for various criminal offenses if they testified. Faced with prison, they refused to testify at Scarpa trial, increasing the possibility that the guilty FBI and DOJ officials would escape the consequences of their criminal acts. The jury found Scarpa, Jr. guilty and Judge Raggi sen-tenced him to 40 years in prison.

Further Example of the True Culture in the FBI After DeVecchio was charged with grave criminal offenses while

criminalizing his FBI position and the FBI offices, a group of other agents established a website and funds to defend DeVecchio. Included in that group was James K. Kallstrom, the FBI agent who directed at-tention away from the missile downing of TWA Flight 800. Their web-site (April 11, 2006) stated:

In 1994, allegations were made that Lin had provided secret in-formation to a top-echelon informant who was a made member of the Persico faction of the warring Colombo family. These allega-tions were extensively investigated by the FBI and the Department


of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility. After a compre-hensive inquiry, the Department concluded that there was no basis for the allegations and dismissed the probe.

[Pattern of Cover-Ups by U.S. District Judge Weinstein] Senior District Court Judge Jack B. Weinstein, (EDNY), who

concluded, after extensive hearings, that the claims were meritless. … Judge Weinstein found these claims to be completely lacking in credibility, and he dismissed them [Thereby protecting DeVecchio and the culture in the FBI and DOJ]. Documented History of Judicial Corruption and Cover-Ups For an understanding of the widespread corruption of federal

judges and their protection of corruption in government offices, several of my books go extensively into that matter.

CHAPTER NINE

Post 9/11 Cover-ups

he widespread nature of the misconduct that enabled hijackers to seize four airliners, with such catastrophic consequences, consti-tuted a national scandal the likes of which had no precedence.

Further cover-ups would continue the culture and the consequences. But to make these problems, affecting such a great numbers of public offices and powerful private institutions—the legal fraternity, much of the media—public confidence would surely be eroded. Whatever the reasons, the consequences of further cover-ups were again ignored and a pattern of cover-ups followed. This chapter addresses some of these cover-ups.

Duplicity of Many People Associated with 9/11 Events Many people held the blame for the conditions that enabled terror-

ists to hijack four airliners. The primary blame was the culture and mis-conduct in the government’s aviation safety offices, which included the FAA, the NTSB, and Department of Transportation. But there were others sharing blame.

Members of Congress had been given details of the corruption that I and a group of government insiders had discovered. They refused to conduct an investigation or to receive our evidence, despite the catas-trophic consequences that would continue if our charges were correct. Not a single member of Congress requested the General Accountability Office to investigate my charges. The GAO is the investigative agency for Congress, and the agency that can initiate investigations on their own.

Despite the horrendous pain and suffering, and deaths, associated with these air disasters, not a single person in any of these government positions exercised their legal and moral responsibility to receive our evidence. It was as if they knew the truth of the charges and the enor-

T


mous scandal, and decided that the information should never be made known.

Duplicity of Justice Department Officials The Justice Department personnel who I contacted, offering evi-

dence of criminal activities affecting national security and associated with many deaths, engaged in a constant pattern of cover-ups, thereby obstructing justice and enabling great harm upon national security.

The passive obstruction of justice eventually took a more active form when Justice Department prosecutors and federal judges charged me with criminal contempt of court for filing papers in federal courts seeking to report the federal crimes as part of the federal crime report-ing statute.

Refusal to Respond Even After 3,000 Deaths After September 11, 2001, members of Congress surely recognized

the consequences of blocking me and my group of other former gov-ernment agents from providing evidence of misconduct that enabled hijackers to seize four airliners. Despite knowing the catastrophic con-sequences of cover-ups, they continued to ignore my letters offering to provide evidence. Now, they had an interest in protecting their own complicity in the events of 9/11.

Casual Hearing by Members of Congress Congress was finally forced to conduct hearings. After months of delay, a cavalier joint congressional inquiry was held, purportedly to discover the areas of blame that allowed hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11. Avoiding the corrupt and criminal activities in the govern-ment’s aviation safety offices—where the primary area of blame ex-isted, and within the FBI and CIA—where secondary blame existed, they focused on the more innocent so-called “intelligence failures.” If they hadn’t done that, there was such a massive paper trail that I caused to exist in various government offices and in the court, that attention would have focused on a nasty can of worms that included their own involvement through cover-ups. Their final report (December 10, 2002) stated:

Review of the events surrounding September 11 has revealed a number of systemic weaknesses that hindered the Intelligence Community’s counter terrorism efforts before September 11. If not addressed, these weaknesses will continue to undercut U.S. counter terrorist efforts. In order to minimize the possibility of attacks like September 11 in the future, effective solutions to those problems need to be developed and fully implemented as soon as possible.

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 289

Stonewalling by the Bush White House Referring to the block by the Bush White House, one media article

(January 26, 2003) stated that 9/11 panelist, Jim Roemer, complained that White House officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, John Ashcroft, and Condoleezza Rice, refused to testify to the congres-sional panel. Another member of the congressional panel, Senator John Mc Cain, complained that the Bush administration “slow-walked and stonewalled” the House-Senate inquiry. McCain said, “I don’t see how you can have a thorough investigation without talking to the people who were in charge throughout the time period prior to 9/11.”

“Undercutting the 9/11 Inquiry” was the heading of a New York Times editorial (March 31, 2003) that stated:

Reasonable people might wonder if the White House, having failed in its initial attempt to have Henry Kissinger steer the inves-tigation, may be resorting to budgetary starvation as a tactic to hobble any politically fearless inquiry. The committee’s mandate includes scrutiny of intelligence failures and other government ar-eas.

As things now stand, $3 million budgeted as start-up funding could run out this summer. An estimated $14 million is needed for the task of finding out precisely how the attackers were able to pull off their plot in which nearly 3,000 people died. This seems a bar-gain given the importance of the mission. By comparison, the in-quiry into the shuttle disaster’s loss of seven lives may cost an es-timated $40 million, and the inquiry into the Whitewater contro-versy ate up more than $30 million. Rare Hint at Serious Problems and Cover-ups A rare article questioning the absence of an investigation into why

hijackers were able to seize four airliners appeared in the New York Times by Jim Dwyer, with the headline, “A Calamity Unimaginable in Scope, and Unexamined in All Its Dimensions.” The half-page article stated:

No inquiry remotely similar in scope, energy or transparency has examined the attacks of last Sept. 11, the devastating collapse of two of the world’s tallest structures, the deaths at the Pentagon or on United Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania. A handful of tightly focused reviews have taken place mostly in secret, con-ducted by private consultants, or by Congressional committees.

One year later, the public knows less about the circumstances of 2,801 deaths at the foot of Manhattan in broad daylight than people in 1912 knew within weeks about the Titanic, which sank in the middle of an ocean in the dead of night.


“You can hardly point to a cataclysmic event in our history, whether it was the sinking of the Titanic, the Pearl Harbor attack, the Kennedy assassination, when a blue-ribbon panel did not set out to establish the facts and, where appropriate, suggest reforms,” Mr. Timoney said. “That has not happened here.” [John F. Timoney, former senior police commander in New York and former police commissioner in Philadelphia.]

Why this national reluctance to face the country’s bloodiest modern disaster in all its dimensions?

Experience had shown that it would do no good, but I sent a letter

to Dwyer explaining some of the reasons why there was no investiga-tion, and the massive record of misconduct starting with government air safety officials, the massive cover-ups by people holding key positions in the three branches of government. No response. Complicity of FBI and Other Justice Department Personnel

Starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent, and while act-ing as an independent counsel in the FAA, I made my charges of deadly federal criminal misconduct known to FBI agents and several U.S. attorneys, along with the head of the Department of Justice. I en-countered the standard refusal to receive evidence that implicated fed-eral personnel.

I encountered Justice Department block when I circumvented the block and appeared before a federal grand jury in Denver while I was a federal agent. I encountered their blocks when I filed federal actions under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4) seeking to re-port the Trojan-horse-like corruption in government offices. In 1986, Justice Department prosecutors charged me, a former federal agent and witness, with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report crimi-nal activities, including those that created the conditions enabling ter-rorists to seize four airliners on 9/11.

I had notified FBI chief Robert Muller of the criminal activities while he was in the U.S. attorney’s office in San Francisco, and then after he became head of the FBI, followed by the usual cover-up. The same notification was sent to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and prior U.S. Attorney Generals. They refused to receive the evidence that I and other former government agents sought to report related to other areas of corruption implicating government officials and other govern-ment personnel.

Justice Department personnel prosecuted the head of a multi-agency task force that focused on the drug operations of people in the New York-New Jersey areas, including the Jersey City terrorists who


the following year bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. The prose-cution of that agent halted the investigations and sent a message to other government agents not to proceed with the investigations. That obstruction of justice tactic enabled the Jersey City terrorists to proceed with the bombing of the World Trade Center a year later, in 1993.

This typical retaliation against government agents is endless, and includes the false imprisonment of another FBI agent, Richard Taus, one of my many sources. He was falsely charged to silence his expo-sure of CIA involvement with organized crime drug smuggling, illegal funding of Iraq during the 1980s, and other offenses.

The same culture was shown by the FBI’s support for organized crime in the Boston area, with William Bulger and others, wherein FBI agents—with Washington approval—provided the names of govern-ment informants to organized crime figures, causing the informants to be murdered. I have acquired information from organized crime insid-ers that the same conditions existed in the New York City area, show-ing the widespread culture in the FBI, which obviously is not compati-ble with protecting U.S. interests. Considerable other evidence is avail-able to show the depravity of this culture. I offered this information to members of Congress and the Justice Department; none responded.

As I detailed in several of my books, some of the other areas in which Justice Department personnel obstructed justice, with serious and sometimes catastrophic consequences, included the following: • Acting in a manner that enabled terrorist groups to obtain posses-

sion of large numbers of surface to air missiles in 1995. • Filing sham criminal charges against a highly respected Customs

agent and head of a multi-agency drug task force that was targeting the money source for Jersey City terrorists, which caused the inves-tigations to end. These terrorists subsequently exploded a bomb in the World Trade Center in 1993. Ramzi Yousef, for instance, es-caped and planned to place bombs on 11 U.S. airliners departing Far East locations. He also had knowledge of the planned hijacking of U.S. airliners and ramming them into buildings.

• Filing criminal contempt of court charges against me, a former fed-eral air safety agent, for attempting to report corruption within the government’s aviation safety offices, which was being reported un-der the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting stat-ute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.

• Filing sham criminal charges against a former Mossad agent and head of an international investigative firm who filed a report de-scribing the terrorists who actually placed the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103.


• Filing sham charges against a covert DIA agent who provided evi-dence showing a CIA-DEA drug pipeline that facilitated the place-ment of the bomb on Board Pan Am Flight 103 that exploded over Lockerbie.

• Filing sham criminal charges against a counter-terrorism expert, Keith Idema, who had discovered, while training Russian and Lithuanian government and military personnel, the theft of suitcase nuclear bombs and other nuclear material from Russian arsenals, and learned about FBI and CIA agents who were giving U.S. se-crets to the Russians. The false charges blocked discovery of how the nuclear material was being stolen, blocked discovery of who had already received the suitcase nuclear bombs and nuclear mate-rial, and blocked discovery of the identities of the spies in the CIA and FBI.

• Filed sham criminal charges against a covert CIA agent for testify-ing about the U.S. personnel he saw in Europe who were involved with the scheme that bribed Iranian terrorists to delay the release of U.S. hostages held in Iran, the intent being to alter the 1981 presi-dential elections. That operation was known as October Surprise, and is detailed in Defrauding America. Complicity of Many Members of Congress

For several years prior to September 11, 2001, I repeatedly notified members of Congress (some by certified mail) of the serious corruption that I and other government agents had discovered in the government’s aviation safety offices, within the Justice Department, and the Central Intelligence Agency. I repeatedly requested that they receive testimony and evidence from me and other former and present government agents. Our offers were repeatedly ignored. The serious matters that I sought to report included, for instance, reports of (a) surface to air missiles being acquired by terrorists, made possible by actions of FBI and CIA personnel; (b) suitcase nuclear de-vices being smuggled from the former Soviet Union through Lithuania, and which will surely be used in American cities at some future date; (c) drug smuggling into the United States by people acting under cover of government positions and covert operations; (d) Soviet spies in the FBI and CIA offices, made known prior to their discovery; (e) retalia-tion against FBI agents seeking to report criminal activities of CIA per-sonnel; and (f) other matters inflicting harm upon national interests. Never Were my Charges Disputed No one ever denied the validity of my charges. Nor would they be in a position to have done so. Initially, when the corruption was related


primarily to the FAA, some members of Congress admitted the gravity of what I charged, but then refused to act on the excuse that these mat-ters were not in their area of responsibilities. (Tell that to the families of the 9/11 victims!) The matters were in their areas of responsibilities. They also had the option of requesting the General Accountability Of-fice, the congressional investigative body, to receive my evidence. They also had a responsibility under the federal crime reporting statute to receive my evidence of federal crimes. The “Butterfly Effect” Ironically, if any of the recipients of these charges had acted when this information was presented to them, it is very probable that the cor-ruption within the government’s aviation safety offices (and elsewhere) could have been halted and the conditions enabling hijackers to seize airliners for the past 50 years corrected. The present cover-up will have a similar “butterfly effect” upon the United States and its people.

Post 9/11 Reports and Cover-ups I continued my practice of putting people on notice that had a duty

to receive my evidence relating to matters inflicting great harm upon national interests. The cover-ups had been continuing for so many years, with such tragic consequences, involving so many people in key government positions, and the media, that the corruption was too exten-sive for anyone to finally expose any part of it. I wanted to at least make a record that they had been notified if, by some fluke, this infor-mation would leak out and be acted upon by people that could force the issues. The following is the letter that I sent to FBI director Robert Mueller, (minus the 14 footnotes that went with the original).

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, Unfriendly skies October 18, 2001 Robert S. Mueller III, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation 935 Pennsylvania Ave., SW Washington, DC 20535-0001 Certified: 7000 1670 0012 2751 8636

Reference: Former federal air safety inspector report of documented corruption that insured the success of the September 11 hijackers and prior fatal hijackings

To Mr. Mueller:


Because the success of the September 11 terrorists and prior terrorist events have been made possible by documented corruption within the Federal Aviation Administration, and that this corruption and the related tragic conse-quences will continue if the usual cover-ups occur, I am putting you on notice of these matters. It is my evaluation, as a former federal agent for the Federal Aviation Administration, that these matters constitute federal crimes associated with the September 11 tragedies. The following matters are supported by sub-stantial evidence.

My credibility arises from years of sophisticated military and airline pilot-ing experience, starting in World War II, and more important, as a former fed-eral air safety inspector holding air safety responsibilities for the most senior program at the world’s largest airline. It was during this last period that I started documenting the corruption that played a key role in many fatal airline crashes, including hijackings.

Without these corrupt acts, the September 11 tragedies would not have oc-curred. Obviously, the people perpetrating the corrupt acts, and those covering up for the acts, share blame for what happened on that fateful day. Failure to identify these problems in a public forum will prevent bringing a halt to these matters and as usual bring about their continuation. The following are a few highlights of the corrupt practices that played a role in the 5,000 plus deaths of September 11:

Culpability Of FAA Personnel Documented pattern of corruption within the Federal Aviation Administra-

tion that made possible the success of the September 11 terrorist hijackings (and many prior fatal hijackings). Evidence shows that the refusal to order corrective actions was a standard reaction to reports by federal air safety in-spectors and that this nonfeasance was part of a corrupt culture within the FAA. Included in this culture were such acts as FAA management: (1) Blocking federal air safety inspectors from carrying out the investigative

and corrective functions of the federal government (2) Threats against federal air safety inspectors not to report serious air safety

problems and violations. (3) Destruction of official air safety reports. (4) Threats and various forms of retaliation against inspectors who continue

to act as required by federal law; (5) Repeated refusal to order corrective actions when such air safety problems

or air safety violations were involved in fatal airline crashes. Refusal to order changes that would prevent hijackers taking control of aircraft would be one of the results of this corrupt culture. The evidence of this misconduct is found in:

• Sequestered FAA records showing major air safety problems and safety violations and the related fatal airline crashes.

• The records and transcripts of an FAA hearing held in Denver during which I acted as an independent prosecutor, providing evidence of deep-seated corruption in the FAA and specific crashes made possible by the corruption. Fatal airline crashes occurring during the Denver FAA hearing

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 295where I acted as an independent prosecutor. These airline crashes occurred in my area of federal air safety responsibilities and continued the series of crashes caused or permitted to occur by the exact same air safety viola-tions and problems, and their cover-ups, that I reported into official re-cords of the United States government.

• By federal lawsuits that I filed under authority of the federal crime report-ing statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4) (requiring the reporting of criminal activi-ties to a federal court or other federal officer), and Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (providing for a federal court order to force federal officials to perform their duty and halt their corrupt and criminal activities).

• As further detailed in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies. These tragedies include the prior airliner crash into New York City that was the world’s worst at that time and which occurred in the program for which I had fed-eral air safety responsibilities.

• By numerous prior fatal hijackings. Included in my many reports were reports relating to the hijacking dangers and recommendations to halt hi-jackers from commandeering the aircraft. These common-sense changes would have prevented many fatal hijackings, including those that occurred on September 11, 2001. The refusal to order the corrective actions was not a one-time event or from ignorance. Rather, from a documented pattern of corruption, malfeasance, nonfeasance, threats and harassment against fed-eral air safety inspectors who attempted to comply with their federal air safety responsibilities. Culpability of Justice Department Personnel Relating To Air Tragedies Documented cover-ups by Justice Department personnel that made possi-

ble the continuation of these air tragedies. My attempts, as a federal air safety inspector, to report these corrupt matters to various divisions of the U.S. De-partment of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and several U.S. Attorney offices, were repeatedly blocked by Justice Department person-nel. My initial complaints of criminal activities, made while I was a federal air safety inspector, related to a series of aviation disasters occurring in my area of federal air safety responsibilities. I filed these complaints with the Federal Bu-reau of Investigation, with various U.S. Attorney offices, and with the Justice Department in Washington.

Culpability of Federal Judges In FAA and Other Corruption Repeated obstruction of justice by federal judges. Federal judges, primar-

ily in the Ninth Circuit courts within California, blocked every attempt by me (and my group of other former federal agents) to report these and other criminal activities to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute. These documented obstruction of justice acts by federal judges were criminal acts under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, and 4. During my initial judicial attempts, Justice Department lawyers filed papers to dismiss the lawsuits, despite admitting the gravity of the allegations during private conversations. Federal judges then refused to receive the evidence, which was then followed by several major air disasters due to the same internal FAA problems. The details of this scenario are found in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies and in a federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada.


in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada. Expansion Of Corruption By Federal Judges The judicial and Justice Department obstruction of justice continued for

many years, making possible many tragedies—including the September 11 terrorism. These tragedies were associated with the same criminal activities that I and other former federal agents sought to report to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute. As I continued to discover additional areas of criminal activities with the help of other government agents I continued seeking to report them to a federal court as clearly required by the federal crime reporting statute. (The pattern of cover-ups by Justice Department per-sonnel prevented reporting them to that government agency.)

Again and again, federal judges refused to receive the information and evidence, in clear violation of their administrative duties under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. As the reported criminal activities reached even higher into key govern-ment positions, federal judges issued unlawful and unconstitutional orders barring me, for the remainder of my life, from access to the federal courts! These orders obviously had a two-fold purpose: One was to block me and the other government agents from reporting the criminal activities. Two, the orders terminated for me all federal defenses against a bizarre scheme filed by a CIA-front San Francisco law firm to strip me of the $10 million in real estate assets that funded my exposure activities. These matters are described in the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America and in a federal lawsuit.

Judicial and Justice Department Retaliation Against Former Federal Agent To Silence Him Compounding obstruction of justice and massive civil rights violations.

Federal judges and Justice Department personnel, from 1987 to 1995, then retaliated against me for filing papers in the federal courts that attempted to report the criminal activities and for exercising federal defenses against the civil rights violations that were part of the scheme to block these reports. These retaliatory acts were felonies, and helped continue the corrupt activities that insured the success of the September 11 hijackers. Justice Department prosecutors and federal judges denied me a jury trial, subjected me to a kanga-roo court trial, and sentenced me to six months in federal prison. (I had re-cently undergone a six-bypass coronary-artery surgery, and was nearing 70 years of age when this happened.)

While in prison, federal judges forced me into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and then ordered all my assets, including my home and sole source of income, liq-uidated. These orders were issued while violating the legal and constitutional requirement of a notice of hearing, a hearing, and legally recognized cause for taking a person’s life assets. These assets were then turned over to embezzler Charles Duck, later identified with committing the nation’s worst trustee em-bezzlement. He had been protected by your San Francisco U.S. Attorney’s office and then when the media forced your office to take action to halt further investigations into the corrupt Chapter 11 courts, a sweetheart plea bargain was made. I was subsequently converted from a multi-millionaire to a state of poverty, under the area of responsibility of your office, and with the obvious intent to halt my exposure of the criminal activities. But there is more!

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 297FBI-CIA Enabled Acquisition of Missiles by Afghan Terrorists CIA and FBI personnel made surface-to-air missiles available to Afghan

terrorists. The documented conduct of FBI and CIA personnel in 1995 made surface to air missiles available to Afghan terrorists cells, which presumably included the Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda group. These matters are described in an October 30, 1995, letter sent to every member of the House and Senate intelligence committees, warning them of the imminent transfer of these mis-siles and seeking their help in preventing the transfer.

(www.defraudingamerica.com/missiles_specter_oct20.html) Not a single congressional recipient responded, making possible the transfer of missiles that will surely be used against U.S. commercial aircraft. Six months later, TWA Flight 800 was downed. This matter is further described in the third edi-tion of the book, Defrauding America and in a July 30, 1996, letter to the FBI.

Justice Department Personnel Protecting Drug Money Source Of Terrorist Cells Justice Department personnel protecting the funding source for World

Trade Center terrorists. Justice Department personnel blocked a multi-agency drug task force that was targeting the drug money funding sources for terrorist cells in the New Jersey-New York areas. In addition, Justice Department prosecutors falsely charged the head of that multi-agency task force with criminal violation of the civil rights of one of the suspected drug traffickers as part of this obstruction of justice. These Justice Department activities contin-ued the funding source for the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in 1995, who initiated plans to place bombs on 11 U.S. airliners leaving Far East locations, and presumably helped fund the September 11, 2001, hijack-ings. These matters are described in the book, Drugging America.

Justice Department Cover-up of Terrorists in Pan Am Flight 103 Justice Department personnel protecting the terrorists who bombed Pan

Am Flight 103. Justice Department personnel covered up for the terrorists who actually placed the bomb on board Pan Am Flight 103, which shifted attention from the country harboring the terrorists. Justice Department personnel fraudu-lently filed criminal charges against two people who reported the truth (former Mossad agent and former undercover agent for the U.S. Department of De-fense). These matters are described in the third edition of Defrauding America.

Consequences of These Criminal And Civil Rights Violations Extended To September 11! The September 11 tragedies are only the latest consequence of the docu-

mented corruption in government and its cover-up by government personnel. The guilty include personnel within the FAA, the NTSB, Department of Transportation, Justice Department, federal judges, and members of Congress. Their roles are spelled out in detail in the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America, and Drugging America.

Multiple Adversaries The American people have been victimized by the people and the culture

briefly described in this letter. Nothing said here is to detract from the enor-mous crimes of the terrorist groups. However, it must be realized that none of the deaths and related harms would have occurred without the documented


corruption of people in key government positions in the three branches of gov-ernment. They must be publicly identified and removed from office in order to mount an effective defense against more terrorist attacks. The people leading this nation in this time of great crisis include many of the same people whose culture of corruption and cover-ups insured the success of the terrorist groups. Tragedies caused or made possible by their previous acts will surely result in more of the same.

Sincerely, Rodney Stich cc:

• Letter (October 20, 1995) sent to every member of the house and senate intelligence committees seeking help in preventing surface-to-air missiles about to being acquired by Afghan terrorists.

(www.defraudingamerica.com/missiles_specter_oct20.html) • Letter (July 30, 1996) sent to FBI agent making a record of threats for me

to remain quiet about these matters. (www.defraudingamerica.com/fbidaley_july30.html) • Letter (October 2, 2001) sent to Attorney General Ashcroft listing some of

these corrupt acts that enabled the success of the September 11 hijackers. (www.defraudingamerica.com/ashcroft_letter_wtc.html) Mueller’s History of Cover-ups Mueller was the U.S. Attorney in San Francisco where I reported to

him in 1997 areas of documented criminal activities in the bankruptcy courts, in the federal courts, and the actions by federal judges blocking the reporting of criminal activities which they must receive under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, and their misuse of the courts to retaliate against me. The federal crimes that I sought to report were those that affected the condi-tions that insured the success of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001. Mueller had a duty to intervene in these federal offenses. Instead, he covered up for them, which was a crime under the same crime re-porting statute.

The criminal activities, and his cover-up of them, assisted in mak-ing possible the continuation of the great harm upon national interests, including national security. On the basis of his obstruction of justice in these matters, it is natural to assume that he would continue the cover-ups in the ultra political office of U.S. Attorney general. If he had acted, or any of the other people that I notified had acted, actions could have


been started that most probably would have prevented the successful terrorist acts on September 11, and very possibly have discouraged ter-rorists from plans for more attacks upon U.S. interests.

Other Areas of Cover-up by Mueller Mueller was involved in the prosecutions related to the bombing of

Pan Am flight 103 and surely knew of the false charges against the Libyans and knew the Syrian terrorists who actually placed the bomb on Pan Am under an Iranian contract in retaliation for U.S. forces shooting down an Iranian airliner that killed 290 people.

He was in the U.S. Attorney’s office during the massive bankruptcy court corruption involving Justice Department trustees, judge-appointed trustees, and federal judges, and which continues to this date. These matters are detailed in the third and later editions of Defrauding Amer-ica and Unfriendly Skies.

He was acting U.S. Attorney in Boston during the time that the Boston FBI office was protecting organized crime figures and murder-ers in the Winter Hill gang. He came to the U.S. Attorney’s office in San Francisco in 1976 after leaving his lawyer role at the San Francisco law firm of Pillsbury Madison and Sutro, which are believed to have close ties to the CIA.

He was in the U.S. Attorney’s office responsible for prosecuting people involved in the BCCI bank scandal that was more of a cover-up than prosecution. Charles Schumer, a U.S. representative from New York at that time, made a report claiming Justice Department personnel were refusing to pursue the case. Schumer stated “There is possibly a cover-up or conspiracy,” saying the failure to pursue the criminal activities was because there were too many prominent politicians that had connections to BCCI.

The Manhattan District attorney, Robert Morgenthau, who con-ducted his own investigation of BCCI, accused the Justice Department of failing to pursue the case and refusing to share material evidence to prosecute the guilty. BCCI was one of the world’s largest banking scandals that caused people throughout the world to lose their life’s savings. This is detailed in Defrauding America.

The death of 3,000 people made possible by the corruption that I had repeatedly reported provided the opportunity to put other people in government positions that had the responsibility to again act, on notice. A few of these letters are shown here.

Making Record of U.S. Attorney General Cover-up Fully aware that none of those people whose prior cover-ups would

now receive my evidence, I nevertheless wrote letters, some of them certified mailings, to make a record that they had been informed of my charges and my willingness to testify and provide supporting documen-


tation. I sent several letters to Attorney General John Ashcroft prior to the events of 9/11 and letters thereafter. In response to a form letter I received from the attorney general’s office I sent the following letter, solely to make a record, realizing that nothing would cause Ashcroft to allow my information to be made public.

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.ombudsmen.org October 2, 2001 John Ashcroft U.S. Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Certified mail: 7000 1670 0012 2751 8650

Reference: Response to your request for information related to September 11, 2001 terrorist activities

To Mr. Ashcroft: As a former federal air safety inspector-investigator1 for the Federal Avia-

tion Administration and a confidant to many present and former federal agents, I have acquired a great amount of knowledge and evidence relating to the Sep-tember 11 deadly hijackings and related matters. For the purpose of this letter, reference is to the terrorist threat and how a culture within certain federal agencies aided and abetted and insured the success of the hijackers on Sep-tember 11, 2001, and future terrorist attacks.

For credibility, I am a former federal inspector-investigator for the Federal Aviation Administration; a former airline pilot with significant piloting experi-ence in the Middle East, carrying Muslim and Arab passengers to Mecca and Medina from various parts of the Middle East; years of contacts with federal agents who conveyed considerable information to me—including agents of the FBI, DEA, Customs, and CIA, including former heads of secret CIA airlines and CIA financial operations who had information relating to terrorists.

The success of the hijackers on September 11th, and many prior fatal hi-jackings, would not have occurred if the corruption that I documented did not exist. These conditions still exist and will undoubtedly play a key role in future terrorist attacks and other adverse actions against the people of the United States. This letter provides highlights of this misconduct and makes a record

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 301that you and your office have been informed of these matters.

In an attempt to reveal these matters to the public and to circumvent the history of cover-ups by Justice Department personnel, I authored several books seeking to inform the public of these matters, including the matters that in-sured the success of the September 11, 2001, hijackers. These books include the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America and the first edition of Drugging America. The following information highlights several of these matters that I and my group of present and former federal agents discov-ered and documented.

History of Corruption in FAA Insured the Success of the Hijackers While I was an FAA air safety inspector-investigator, holding federal air

safety responsibilities for the most senior program at United Airlines, during a period of numerous airline crashes, I documented a pattern of misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, and corruption within the Federal Aviation Administration.

Among the areas of FAA misconduct were pressure and threats against federal air safety inspectors not to report or act upon major air safety and even criminal activities, despite the repeated occurrence of fatal airline crashes due to these problems; refusal to act upon reports requiring changes to prevent hijackings that I and other federal air safety inspectors made, and many other areas of major air safety violations for which the FAA had a legal duty to take corrective action. Compounding this misconduct, inspectors making these re-ports were harassed and threatened, their official reports destroyed, and their lives and careers adversely affected.

This is the deadly culture that resulted in many fatal airline crashes, in-cluding the prior airline crash into New York City, by United Airlines, that was the world’s worst air disaster at that time. The cover-up of the corruption within the FAA made possible the continuation of the federal offenses and the associated fatalities. The September 11, 2001, tragedies with over 3,000 deaths were simply another consequence of the internal FAA problems and the cover-up of these problems by Justice Department personnel.

I documented these FAA offenses while I was an FAA inspector, and proved their relationship to several specific airline crashes, which included the earlier United Airlines crash into New York City. The hard-core corrupt and criminal misconduct within the FAA, going into the FAA administrator’s of-fice, can be associated with years of specific airline crashes, and constitutes substantial evidence showing how it insured the success of the September 11, 2001, air tragedies. Throughout this period of fraud-related air tragedies, Jus-tice Department personnel repeatedly blocked efforts to expose these serious federal offenses, thereby aiding and abetting the FAA misconduct, which in turn insured the success of the hijacking terrorists. The available evidence supports this relationship. And now, the same Justice Department is covering up for the wrongdoings that in this latest instance took the lives of 6,000 peo-ple!

Highlights of FAA Corruption and Related Airline Disasters In my role as a federal air safety inspector, assisted by many years of ex-

perience as an airline captain, navy flight instructor, and navy patrol plane


commander in World War II, I made numerous reports and the required correc-tive actions addressing air safety and criminal violations affecting air safety. Many of these reports required prompt corrective actions for which the FAA had responsibility to act. In almost every case, the reports that I and other in-spectors made were ignored, despite the pattern of resulting fatal airline crashes.

Nonfeasance Compounded by Criminal Misconduct The reaction to these official reports included (1) warnings not to submit

such reports as the office would look bad when airline accidents resulted from the problems; (2) felony destruction of the official reports which were often followed by resulting fatal airline crashes; (3) threats, harassment, and retalia-tory actions against federal air safety inspectors when the officially required reports continued to be made.

One of my recommendations related to hijackings and how to prevent them. I had recommended installing heavier cockpit doors and removing cockpit door keys from the flight attendants, which would prevent many of the fatal hijackings that subsequently occurred, including the September 11, 2001, hijackings

If these simple measures had been adopted, as common sense dictated, and as FAA responsibility required, many fatal hijackings would have been prevented, including the 6,000 deaths on September 11, 2001, and the enor-mous financial and personal ramifications of the United States in a war mode would not have occurred.

Refusal to act on this obvious safety problem did not fall into the category of corruption as in many other air safety problems, but it was associated with the felonious pattern of destroying inspectors’ reports, pressuring and threaten-ing inspectors not to report safety problems, retaliating against inspectors for making such reports or taking required corrective actions.

This corrupt culture in the FAA subverted the legal and moral responsibilities of the United States government to act on safety problems and safety violations discovered by highly trained and highly experienced federal air safety inspectors. Compounding this corrupt culture among many FAA management personnel was the documented cover-up by personnel in the U.S. Department of Justice, within the NTSB, by members of Congress, and others.

Exercising Federal Remedies to Report Corruption in A Federal Agency As a federal air safety inspector and investigator who discovered these

major federal offenses and the tragic consequences as a part of my official duties, I exercised several remedies seeking to bring a halt to the corruption and related airline crashes. If the widespread obstruction of justice and cover-up had not occurred, the September 11, 2001, tragedies would not have oc-curred. The evidence of these matters is found in government records, in judi-cial records, and communication with government and non-government checks and balances, none of who want this information made available to the public.

The actions I took, which started initially in addressing the corruption blocking the federal government from meeting its air safety responsibilities,

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 303included the following: • I acted as an independent prosecutor, conducting a four-month-long FAA

hearing during which I obtained testimony and considerable evidence showing this culture of malfeasance, misfeasance, nonfeasance, corrup-tion, and during the hearing, perjury and subornation of perjury. Two fatal crashes occurred in my area of responsibilities during that hearing that were caused by the very same air safety problems and criminal activities that I documented. Transcripts and documentation is available to show this relationship.

• I reported these federal offenses to the National Transportation Safety Board (Bureau of air safety in the CAB at that time), to the FBI, to several U.S. Attorneys, and then to the Department of Justice in Washington. Pos-sibly because of the gravity of the criminal activities and the direct rela-tionship to many fatal airline crashes, the response was a cover-up and ob-struction of justice.

• This response made possible the continuation of the air safety and crimi-nal violations, and as expected, a continuation of the resulting crashes and deaths. (These matters are detailed and documented in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies.)

• Seeking to circumvent the obstruction of justice, I appeared before a fed-eral grand jury in Denver. Although individual jurors admitted the gravity of what I was stating, the blockage by the U.S. Attorney kept the jury from taking any action.

• As a federal agent, I filed formal complaints with FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, and encountered a pattern of cover-ups and false statements.

• I reported these matters to members of Congress who had a duty to act. I received numerous sympathetic letters, but all of them refused to act. This is called misprision of felonies, which had dire consequences for the pub-lic.

• Refusing to be a part of the criminal activities in the FAA, I resigned from the FAA. As the air disasters continued to occur from the FAA culture, I exercised other federal remedies. I filed the first of several lawsuits2 in Ninth Circuit federal courts seeking to report the criminal activities to a federal judge under the federal crime reporting statute3 and under a citi-zen’s right4 to seek a court order forcing federal officials to perform their legal duties and to halt their unlawful conduct. District and appellate judges admitted the gravity of the allegations made in the lawsuit, but af-ter U.S. Attorneys filed motions to block the lawsuits, they were dis-missed. These dismissals were followed by even worse air disasters due to the same FAA culture.

• Seeking to circumvent the massive cover-ups and obstruction of justice, I used my considerable assets5 to make the public aware of this pattern of corruption by people in key government positions. I authored and pub-lished the first edition of Unfriendly Skies, (which is now in its third edi-tion). I also started appearing as a guest and expert on hundreds of radio and television shows. These activities were funded by my real estate in-vestments and threatened to expose people in key positions in the three


branches of the federal government. Discovering Other Areas of Corruption in Government As my books and radio and television appearances became known, other

government agents provided me information and documentation on still other areas of corruption6 in government that could be expected on the basis of the corruption that I discovered as a federal inspector.

The gravity of the additional information and documentation caused me to again exercise the responsibilities under the federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4) to report these matters to federal judges, who had the mandatory responsibility to receive the information and evidence. Their reac-tion would eventually insure the success of the September 11, 2001, hijackers: • Federal judges repeatedly refused to receive the data and evidence that I

and my group of other former and present federal agents sought to report. These federal offenses included the documented corruption in the FAA and by people in other key government positions. These corrupt and criminal activities and the standard obstruction of justice offenses are de-scribed in three books: Unfriendly Skies, Defrauding America, and Drug-ging America.

• Federal judges issued unlawful and unconstitutional orders barring me, for the remainder of my life, from access to the district and appellate courts. These orders (1) blocked the reporting of these criminal activities, and (2) blocked me from defending against judicial acts that corruptly seized the $10 million in real estate that funded my exposure of the criminal and cor-rupt activities. (Further information about the actions taken to block my exposure of the criminal activities and the involvement of federal judges can be found in a pending federal lawsuit at the Internet site: www.defraudingamerica.com/lawsuit_reno.html.)

• When I discovered other criminal activities from government agents7 and sought to report these matters, as required under the federal crime report-ing statute, Justice Department prosecutors and federal judges charged me with criminal contempt of court (on the basis that I had been barred for the remainder of my life from federal court access). From 1986 to 1995, these two groups had me charged me with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report these criminal activities. This retaliation, for reporting matters that made the World Trade Center 1993 bombing and September 11, 2001, hijackings possible reflects the role of Justice Department per-sonnel and federal judges in the corruption that made possible the death of 3,000 people on September 11, and made possible other crimes against the American people by persons acting under cover of government positions. Justice Department Corruption Aided Funding of Terrorist Cells

Justice Department misconduct aided and abetted various terrorist cells located in the New Jersey and New York areas which were later implicated in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the September 11, 2001, hijackings. Details of these activities, as provided to me by government agents, are found in the book I wrote, Drugging America. The book describes how Justice Department

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 305personnel blocked federal agents from arresting people whose drug activities funded terrorist cells, some of which subsequently bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 and the cells who planned to place bombs on 11 U.S. airliners departing from Far East locations.

Evidence indicates that some of these same terrorist cells, protected by Justice Department personnel, were responsible for the September 11, 2001, hijackings. Further aid to the hijackers was the corrupt culture in the FAA that had been covered-up by Justice Department personnel for decades, as proven by my letters and judicial records.

In addition to blocking the drug-related funding of the terrorists, Justice Department personnel falsely charged, prosecuted, and brought about the im-prisonment of the head of a federal drug task force who was targeting the drug activities that funded the terrorist cells. My attempt to report these activities under the federal crime reporting statute was blocked by federal judges and Justice Department personnel, who then retaliated against me for seeking to make these reports. (Details in my various books, and: www.defraudingamerica.com; www.unfriendlyskies.com; and www.druggingamerica.com.)

FBI-CIA Personnel Making SAM Missiles Available to Terrorists Another of the many areas of misconduct involving Justice Department

personnel—which provided further aid to the terrorist groups—occurred in 1995. General Rashid Dostum, head of one of the groups constituting the Af-ghanistan Northern Alliance, who was fighting Osama bin Laden and fighting to keep the Taliban from taking control of Afghanistan, offered to provide the United States with several dozen surface-to-air missiles and possibly as many as 100. Negotiations arising out of this offer occurred in Los Angeles and in-volved CIA and FBI personnel, and a friend of mine who was at one time the titular head of a secret CIA financial operation based in Hawaii. It was also known that Afghan terrorists were bidding on these missiles, which could be expected to be used against U.S. airliners.

These contacts with a key fighting group in northern Afghanistan pro-vided the United States an excellent opportunity to obtain their cooperation to fight the Afghan terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, and prevent the Tali-ban group from taking control of Afghanistan.

FBI and CIA personnel involved in the Los Angeles negotiations refused to accept the surface-to-air missiles and refused to cooperate with General Dostum. This CIA and FBI conduct caused my CIA source great concern for subsequent missile attacks upon U.S. airliners from surface to air missiles that would be obtained by Afghan terrorists, including the Osama bin Laden al Qaeda group. My source then provided me with information and documenta-tion concerning the negotiations, which I then used as the basis for a three-page letter sent to every member of the House and Senate intelligence commit-tees. In this October 20, 1995, letter I urged the recipients to immediately con-tact me and my CIA source to prevent the surface to air missiles getting into the hands of the Afghan terrorists. That letter was sent about six months before the downing of TWA Flight 800. Not a single recipient responded, despite my background as a federal agent and my source’s CIA background and part of the


negotiations occurring in Los Angeles. If that cooperation with General Dostum had not been refused, it is very

possible that coordinated actions could have been taken against Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda group and the Taliban. It is also probable that missile attacks upon U.S. airliners by Afghan and other terrorist groups that have yet to occur could have been prevented. It is also probable that a missile brought down TWA Flight 800, despite the standard cover-up by the NTSB political board members and the Justice Department and CIA.

Covering Up for Terrorists Who Planted the Bomb on Flight 103 Another terrorist tragedy involving misconduct and cover-up. As detailed

in the third edition of Defrauding America, Justice Department personnel cov-ered up and protected the Syria-based terrorists who placed the bomb on board Pan Am Flight 103. This cover-up was motivated by two factors: (1) Syria’s cooperation was needed for the Gulf War; (2) the logistics for placing the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103 was facilitated by the CIA-DEA drug smuggling operation conducted out of the DEA office in Nicosia, using Pan Am aircraft departing Frankfurt for the United States (Detroit).

Much of the details and support for these matters are found in (1) FAA re-cords, primarily of the hearing held in Denver where I acted as an independent prosecutor; (2) federal lawsuits filed in U.S. district courts; (3) letters sent to various divisions of the Department of Justice (including the July 30, 1996, letter sent to the FBI which is on the Internet site at

http://www.defraudingamerica.com/fbidaley_jul30.html). That letter makes addresses one of many examples of FBI cover-ups that I

first encountered as a federal air safety inspector, the cover-ups of which made possible subsequent air disasters. That letter relates to the acquisition of sur-face-to-air missiles by Afghan and other terrorist groups, the refusal to cooper-ate with the Afghan group fighting Osama bin Laden’s terrorist group, fighting the Taliban group, and the FBI’s threat against me, warning me to remain quiet about the information I had.

What is stated in this letter is only a small part of the documented corrup-tion involving people in key government positions whose conduct had in-flicted, or permitted to be inflicted, great harm upon Americans.

Withholding this information from the public keeps the same culture, the same people, the same adversaries, in the decision-making process as the United States seeks to prevent more terrorist activities! Withholding this in-formation protects those whose corrupt acts played a key role in the 6,000 re-cent deaths and the incalculable financial and other harm inflicted upon the United States. The people perpetrating these acts that insured the success of the hijackers are also adversaries to America and its people. Protecting them subverts the process necessary by America to defend against the terrorist threat. Based upon the 40 years of documented Justice Department miscon-duct, the same cover-up can be expected to continue, which will insure further harm to the American people.


Post 9/11 Cover-ups 307ENDNOTES

1. Former federal air safety inspector who held federal air safety responsi-

bilities for the most senior program at United Airlines; a former airline pilot with considerable international experience, including flying in the Middle East, flying Moslem pilgrims to Mecca, living with Arab and Moslem person-nel; former Navy patrol plane commander in World War II, confidant to many insiders including former agents of the FBI, DEA, Customs, CIA, including former heads of secret CIA airlines and secret CIA financial operations, and author of several books, including three editions of Unfriendly Skies and De-frauding America, and one edition of Drugging America (with expanded edi-tions pending).

2. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. de-nied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, viola-tions of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible re-peated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long stand-ing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Depart-ment of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other ac-tions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.

3. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

4. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff..

5. At that time my real estate holdings exceeded $10 million in value, most of which was equity.

6. Years of drug smuggling into the United States by the CIA (and during the 1980s, Oliver North and the National Security Council, U.S. military), pattern of corruption in Ninth Circuit bankruptcy courts, and a series of other corrupt activities implicating people in key federal positions, as described in Defrauding America, Drugging America, and Unfriendly Skies.

7. These federal agents were from the FBI, DEA, Customs, CIA, includ-ing former heads of secret CIA airlines and secret CIA financial operations.


Ashcroft never responded to that letter, or the prior letter. Mineta’s History of Cover-ups When Norman Mineta was a congressman from California on the

aviation committee, with oversight responsibilities for the Federal Avia-tion Administration, I wrote to him several times about the deep-seated FAA misconduct and how that misconduct had resulted in a series of preventable air disasters and would continue to do so until a major in-vestigation was conducted using former FAA insiders willing to talk. The crashes that I brought to his attention included the years of fatal hijackings for which federal air safety inspectors had reported preventa-tive actions that were never taken.

Now that President Bush named him Secretary of the U.S. Depart-ment of Transportation with aviation safety responsibilities, I again wrote to him, and again he never answered my letters. This gives some idea of the bankrupt status of the many government divisions now re-sponsible for the nation’s aviation safety and national security. The May 25, 2002, letter to Mineta follows:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, and Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.ombudsmen.org

May 25, 2002 Norman Mineta, Secretary U.S. Department Of Transportation 400 7th St, SW Washington, DC 20590

Ref: Insider comments on conditions insuring the success of the 9/11 hi-jackers, 40 years of prior fatal hijackings, and other areas of expected suc-cessful terrorism

To Mr. Mineta:

In light of your years of cover-ups concerning the matters in the Federal Aviation Administration that constitute the secondary blame for the success of the four groups of hijackers on September 9, 2001, this letter is merely to make a record for others to see concerning the role that you played in the 3,000 deaths on 9/11 and the deaths that will surely follow the continuing cover-ups.

Several times, while you were a member of Congress, I described to

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 309you’re the documented misconduct and corruption within the FAA responsible for years of air disasters, including years of fatal hijackings. Never once did your respond as you covered up for these tragedy-related federal offenses. The following contain some of the details of what I brought to your attention and which by being covered up insured the success of the 9/11 hijackers: • As a former key federal air safety inspector, I repeatedly offered to pro-

vide evidence of gross incompetence, dereliction of duty, and corruption within the Federal Aviation Administration that played key roles in many air disasters, including aircraft hijackings, etc. This misconduct—and its cover-up, was the most important cause for the 3,000 deaths on September 11 after that of the hijackers themselves and those who funded their crimes.

• I offered to provide you and other members of the Senate (and House) intelligence committees with evidence supporting the detailed information about surface to air missiles about to be transferred to terrorist groups in 1995—about six months before a SAM missile brought down TWA Flight 800. Not a single one of you even responded to the three-page detailed let-ter written by a key federal air safety inspector and with the input from a former head of a secret CIA financial operation.

• I repeatedly described to you misconduct in the FBI and other government offices that was subverting national security. Never was the information provided by me and several dozen other government agents received.

Because of the heavy involvement, duplicity or worse, by you and other mem-bers of the Senate and House, the public will never learn about the felony cover-ups that in one day alone—and these are only the most visible—made possible 3,000 deaths and massive collateral damage. Now I will go into more detail.

Unusual Background for Determining Corruption Relating to Success of Terrorists Here is my credibility and my ability to make these statements. When I

was a federal air safety inspector, I was requested by the government to take over and correct the program that was causing the worse series of air disasters in the nation’s history. Prior to that time, I was an international airline pilot and during World War II I was the youngest Navy patrol plane commander during that war. I wrote books on the deadly politics of air safety, and I have acquired over the years several dozen sources in the FBI, DEA, Customs, and CIA, providing me with still other information relating to misconduct adversely affecting national security. I write about these matters in my books, Unfriendly Skies, Defrauding America, and Drugging America. I have appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows since 1978.

Having said that, the following are highlights of the documented miscon-duct that insured the success of the 9/11 terrorist hijackers, 40 years of prior hijackings, and which will play key roles in future successful terrorist attacks: • The documented hardcore misconduct within the FAA that had more to do

with the success of the September 11 hijackers than any other intelligence shortcoming. To understand this area, you must have my documented evi-dence of deep-seated corruption within the FAA. I acted as an independent


prosecutor in the FAA to bring into a four-month-long trial further evi-dence of this history of tragedy-related misconduct. I have the transcript and other records to show this culture, which is partly described in the third edition of Unfriendly Skies.

• The incompetent FAA administrator has said that the vague knowledge of impending terrorist attacks was not ample for the FAA to have taken ac-tions to prevent the 9/11 hijackings. That is not so. The vague reports were sufficient to have ordered preventative measures that within 24 hours could have prevented the success of the four groups of terrorist hijackers.

• Pattern of hardcore documented corruption by the FBI that repeatedly aided and abetted terrorists, including for instance:

o FBI filing false charges against a highly respected counter-terrorist expert who discovered suitcase nuclear devices and other nuclear material being smuggled from Russia through Lithuania and sold to Middle East terror-ists. This typical Justice Department retaliation destroyed the opportunity to discover how the nuclear devices were being stolen and destroyed the opportunity to discover what terrorist groups had already acquired them and where they might be located. Remember this when the suitcase nu-clear bomb or bombs devastate U.S. cities!

o FBI filing false charges against the respected head of a government multi-agency drug task force that halted the group acting on the source of funds for the Jersey City terrorists who subsequently bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. If this group had not been halted, it is probable that the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center could have been blocked and the activities of the group that eventually hijacked the four airliners could have been halted.

o FBI and CIA conduct during 1995, in Los Angeles, refusing to accept three dozen Stinger missiles from Afghan General Dostum, which was then followed by transfer of an unknown quantity of these missiles to Middle East terrorists. TWA Flight 800 was shot down by a missile from an unknown source about six months later. These missiles may yet shoot down U.S. airliners. Warning letters to prevent the transfer of these mis-siles were sent to 25 members of the House and Senate intelligence com-mittees and each of them covered up for the FBI and CIA questionable conduct.

• Involvement of federal judges in a scheme blocking the reporting of criminal activities that aided and abetted the terrorists. A 20-year docu-mented period of FBI and federal judges blocking former government agents from reporting corruption in government that insured the success of the 9/11 terrorists and other tragedies affecting the American people. I tried to report the corruption within the FAA and the FBI to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.1 These re-ports must be received by federal judges as part of their administrative (not judicial decision making) duties. Instead of receiving these reports, federal judges acted in unison with a CIA-front law firm and Justice De-partment prosecutors, misusing the federal courts to halt the reporting of

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 311criminal activities affected national security that I and several dozen other government agents sought to report. The $10 million in assets that funded my exposure activities were corruptly taken from me, orders were ren-dered permanently barring me access to the federal courts, I was charged with criminal contempt of court for seeking to make these reports, and much more. All of these documented acts were part of the pre-September 11 corruption that insured the success of the terrorists and will insure the success of future terrorism—further insured by the cover-up of this infor-mation.

• Many other forms of FBI misconduct that for many people constitutes a greater threat to them than the terrorists.

• Many warning letters sent to members of Congress, the FBI, and the White House, prior to September 11.

• March 1, 2001, letter to President Bush going into details of criminal ac-tivities in government “adversely affecting the internal security of the United States.” An April 9, 2001, certified letter to President Bush de-scribed the corruption within the FAA that was related to a series of airline crashes, including hijackings, the FBI misconduct that allowed “dozens of SAM missiles to be acquired by terrorist groups.”

• Why the prior tragedy-related endemic cover-ups made the 3,000 deaths possible and the expected continued cover-ups will continue the effect upon the people of the United States.

• The role of certain print and broadcast media in covering up for these crimes and many others, and how such cover-ups made the 3,000 deaths possible.

• And much more of the same that is not addressed in this letter, in the books, or the Internet sites.

More information can be found in the books I wrote and at various Internet sites, including www.unfriendlyskies.com & www.defraudingamerica.com.

There is much more to the corruption in our own government offices that continues to subvert national security. The continued self-serving cover-ups will insure the continuation and worsening harm upon the United States and its people. Continue your felony cover-ups and take credit for worse yet to come.


ENDNOTES 1. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge

of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.


Notifying Senator Dianne Feinstein In another attempt, I sent a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein, who

had ignored earlier letters on other serious matters:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, and Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.ombudsmen.org

May 5, 2002 Senator Dianne Feinstein Senate Hart Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Certified: 7001 2510 0009 4181 9109

Ref: Matters adversely affecting national security in your area of responsibilities.

To Senator Feinstein: The purpose of this letter is to put you on record, as I have done in the

past, of criminal and subversive activities, as discovered by me and other for-mer and present government agents. This letter particularly focuses on docu-ment corrupt and criminal activities in Ninth Circuit courts that have repeat-edly blocked us from reporting these crimes to a federal court as required to be reported by the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.1

Among the consequences of this judicial obstruction of justice was the continuation of deep-seated corruption within the Federal aviation Administra-tion that had as one of its many collateral effects the refusal to order preventa-tive measures reported by inspectors that would have prevented the 3,000 deaths occurring on September 11, 2001, and forty years of prior fatal hijack-ings.

Let me describe my government background and credibility before I pro-ceed further. • I am a former federal air safety inspector who was given the assignment to

correct the most crash-plagued airline program that ever existed in the United States. This experience permitted me to discover the corrupt condi-tions that made possible many airline crashes, and which played a role in the success of the September 11 hijackers.

• Prior to my activities as an FAA inspector I was an international airline captain and prior to that I was a Navy patrol plane commander in World War II.

• I have written numerous highly detailed books on the subject of corrup-tion in the three branches of government and have appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows since 1978.


• I have become a confidant to several dozen other government agents2 who have disclosed to me over the years considerable data and evidence of cor-ruption in other areas of government. I have documented the relationship between these criminal activities—and their cover-ups—and the tragedies inflicted upon the American people.

The criminal activities3 that we insiders discovered include numerous areas affecting major national interests. But this letter focuses primarily on the criminal cover-ups in Ninth Circuit courts that have blocked reporting these crimes and played a key role in their continuation, the obstruction of justice, and the consequences, including those occurring on September 11, 2001. This judicial is partly described in the books, Unfriendly Skies, Defrauding Amer-ica, and Drugging America, and on various Internet sites, including: www.defrauudingamerica.com, and in the following sample highlights: • Pattern of blocking the reporting of criminal activities by Ninth Circuit

federal judges, refusing to receive from former and present government agents, reports of federal crimes to a federal court as required by the fed-eral crime reporting statute.

• Compounding the felony obstruction of justice with unlawful and uncon-stitutional injunctions permanently terminating my legal and constitu-tional rights to the federal district and appellate courts. These unlawful in-junctive orders have permanently terminated the legal rights, legal protec-tions, and legal defenses guaranteed by the laws and constitution of the United States.

• Charging me with criminal contempt of court when I sought to report these crimes to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute. When I attempted to report these criminal activities—including the ones that played a key role in the September 11 terrorism, federal judges charged me with criminal contempt of court, denied me a jury trial, and sentenced me to six months in federal prison. It is a federal crime to harm a former federal agent or witness for seeking to report federal crimes. I was 69 at that time and had recently undergone open-heart surgery for six coronary bypasses.

• While I was in prison on the sham criminal contempt of court charge, a federal judge signed orders seizing my $10 million in assets—that funded my exposure activities, violating the legal and constitutional right to a hearing, notice of hearing, and legal cause. These due process violations were then followed by orders barring me from filing objections to the sei-zure and liquidation of these assets. When I did file an objection, the ob-jection was unfiled and I was charged with criminal contempt of court for exercising the legal and constitutional right to defend against the taking of my home and my life assets. To insure the “success” in blocking my expo-sure activities, I was converted from a multi-millionaire to a state of pov-erty, and stripped of my sole means of income. At the age of 79, the mis-use of the courts against me continues, apparently until I die.

• Evidence of the willingness to destroy the rule of law, when it is in the interest of felony cover-ups of major crimes against the United States, is seen by the sequence of orders by Ninth circuit district and appellate


judges permanently terminating my legal rights, legal protections, and le-gal defenses, through orders permanently barring me from filing papers in the district courts and barring me from filing appeal briefs. These civil rights violations are only the start of a long list that shows Ninth Circuit judges involved in major crimes against the United States. If they will do this to one person for 20 years, they will obviously do this to others who threaten to expose these subversive activities.

• These are only a fragment of the gross criminal obstruction of justice ac-tivities that meets the legal definition for a court system to be a legally recognized racketeering enterprise.

Further Details of Misconduct At Internet Locations and In Books • www.defraudingamerica.com (Details a broad pattern of crimes against

the United States and their cover-ups, as discovered by a group of gov-ernment agents.)

• www.unfriendlyskies.com (Details how deeply entrenched corruption within the FAA caused the conditions to exist that insured the success of the September 11 hijackers, many prior hijackings, and many prior pre-ventable air disasters).

• Placing the name, “Rodney Stich” in a google search engine. (www.google.com) for over 3,000 links to various segments of the corrup-tion and its felony cover-ups by people in key positions in the three branches of the federal government.

• Third edition of Defrauding America, which contains details and docu-mentation of criminal and subversive activities against the United States which I and my group of other former and present government agents had discovered.

• Third edition of Unfriendly Skies, which contains details and documenta-tion of corruption within the government air safety agencies and the fel-ony cover-ups by virtually every government check and balance, and par-ticularly Ninth Circuit district and appellate judges.

• Drugging America, which details and documents the arrogant and corrupt war on drugs, the drug smuggling and cover up of these crimes by people in government, while they simultaneously inflict great harm upon the American people on the pretense of fighting drugs.

• Draconian Adverse Effects Of the Corruption, Its Judicial Cover-ups, and the Cover-ups By People Made Aware Of These Trojan Horse-Like Crimes Against America

• Numerous prior air disasters and deaths, including 40 years of fatal hijack-ings, and the 3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001.

• Continuation of the crashes and deaths, and successful terrorist acts on aviation due to the deeply embedded corruption in government.

• Continuation of terrorism in other areas that is made possible by the wide-spread corruption discovered by government insiders made possible by pattern of cover-ups.

• Continuation of tragedies upon the American people and fraud upon the United States from the many other areas of corruption involving govern-

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 315ment personnel, including the effects of drug smuggling by people in the CIA and other government entities.

• Continuation of the bankruptcy corruption in Ninth Circuit courts that impoverishes great numbers of people every year.

• Continuation of great harm upon government institutions and especially the federal courts.

For your information, I have records of years of total cover-ups by members of Congress of criminal and subversive activities, and the consequences of such crimes and the cover-ups. Sooner or later a sizeable segment of the public may get wise and have the courage to act on this information. Is your reaction now, after 3,000 deaths, going to be a continuation of prior cover-ups? And these deaths are only a fraction of the consequential harm inflicted upon the people.

Finally, this letter, which is on a heavily trafficked Internet site, makes you aware of these crimes, and is a request to provide me with relief against the criminal misuse of the federal courts in your area of immediate responsibil-ity. It is a disgrace when a private citizen, my age, has to endure this David versus Goliath battle seeking to protect U.S. interests, while you and other “leaders” engage in cowardly and felonious cover-ups!


ENDNOTES 1, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge

of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

2. These agents are from the FBI, DEA, Customs, Secret Service, INS, and the CIA, including former heads of secret CIA airlines and CIA financial operations, that participated in drug smuggling and various forms of financial fraud.

3. Criminal activities discovered by government insiders include corrup-tion within the FAA and NTSB, drug smuggling by elements of the CIA and other government personnel, massive fraud in the Ninth Circuit bankruptcy courts, financial fraud involving the CIA, and a string of other corrupt activi-ties against the United States by government insiders, and the felony cover-up of these federal crimes by other government personnel.

I notified President Bush of the ongoing problems, including a cer-

tified letter dated May 17, 2002.


From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, & Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com

May 17, 2002 President George Bush The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20500 Certified: 7001 2510 0009 4181 7570

Ref: Pre-September 11 and Post-September 11 notice to you of corruption that insured the success of the September 11 terrorist groups and will in-sure the success of future terrorists.

To President Bush:

On March 1, 2001, and again on April 7, 2001, I sent to you letters report-

ing the corruption in government offices that were inflicting great harm upon national interests, including national security. If you or a member of your staff had shown any interest in the strong statements made in those letters it is highly probable that action could have been taken to have blocked four groups of hijackers from seizing four airliners. My background certainly provided the basis for checking further with me.

I am a former federal air safety inspector who was assigned the responsibility to correct the conditions resulting in the worst series of fatal airline crashes in the nation’s history. Prior to that I was an international airline captain, and during World War II, a Navy patrol plane commander. (George Bush senior and I received our Navy wings at approximately the same time; he in Corpus Christi and me in Pensacola.) While I was a federal air safety inspector I discovered and documented evidence of this corruption related to a series of airline crashes, one of which was the world’s worst at that time, a DC-8 that crashed into Brooklyn, about one mile from where the World Trade Center was later built.

Corruption-Related Deaths In My Area Of Air Safety Responsibilities I acted as an independent prosecutor while employed by the FAA, and

during a four-month hearing I brought testimony and additional evidence into the record to show the relationship between several major air disasters1 and the deep-seated misconduct at all levels of the federal air safety agency.

I have written books2 to inform the public of serious misconduct in gov-ernment that caused or made possible numerous airline crashes. As I received information and documentation on other areas of corrupt and criminal activi-ties from an increasing number of former and present government agents,3 I wrote books about these matters also, which also adversely affect national se-curity.

After the terrorists, FAA Corruption Was Second in Line For the 3,000

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 317Deaths

The September 11 deaths were simply another déjà vu of the conse-quences from the reported and documented corruption in the FAA, following forty years of prior fatal hijackings and other aviation tragedies that would not have happened if the government’s air safety responsibilities had not been blocked by misconduct within the FAA. Much of the corruption is highlighted in my third edition of Unfriendly Skies, which I wrote in an attempt to circum-vent the endemic cover-ups and to inform and motivate the public concerning these matters. This is the same misconduct that insured the success of the 9/11 terrorists and will continue to subvert the government’s air safety responsibili-ties. However, the corruption that I documented in other areas of government also play major roles in success of terrorism.

Third In Line Third in line to the cause for the 3,000 deaths are those in government

who misused government offices continuously for 20 years to halt my expo-sure activities. Included in this group would be Justice Department personnel and federal judges. The details are in the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America, and at www.defraudingamerica.com/legal_index.html and other Internet sites. Be-cause of this corruption, there will be more successful terrorist attacks on the United States.

Corrupt Government Personnel Have Inflicted More Harm Upon Americans Than Terrorists Unfortunately the actual state of corruption in the three branches of gov-

ernment does not support your infamous statement, “terrorists hate us because we are so good.” The truth is, corruption in government has become endemic, and has inflicted more harm upon the American people than have the terrorists.

Besides what I endured for trying to carry out my air safety responsibili-ties, look at a few other examples that continue to insure the success of terror-ism: • Justice Department personnel retaliating against the head of a multi-

agency drug task force targeting the drug funding operations of Jersey City terrorists. By falsely charging the head of the multi-agency drug task force with criminally violating the civil rights of a suspected drug traf-ficker, the entire operation was shut down. The following year, in 1993, Jersey City terrorists, who received funds from the drug operation, bombed the World Trade Center.

• Justice Department personnel retaliating against a counter terrorism expert who discovered suitcase nuclear bombs being smuggled from Russia through Lithuania and sold to terrorists in the Middle East. The retaliation blocked discovery of how the nuclear devices were being removed from Russian arsenals, prevented discovery of the terrorist groups that had al-ready received the suitcase nuclear devices, and prevented measures to halt the transfer of nuclear devices and nuclear material to terrorist groups.

• Justice Department and CIA personnel who refused in 1995 to accept the offer of three dozen to 100 Stinger missiles that were offered by Afghani General Rashid Dostum. These negotiations were occurring in Los Ange-


les, and included a friend and former head of a secret CIA operation based in Honolulu. The refusal of these surface-to-air missiles resulted in Mid-dle East terrorists acquiring an unknown quantity of them to use against U.S. aircraft. My letters to members of Congress concerning this matter can be found at the following Internet site:

www.defraudingamerica.com/missiles_specter_oct20.doc (or html). • Justice Department retaliation against a contract agent for the Defense

Intelligence Agency when he prepared a declaration describing what he discovered about a CIA-DEA drug operation using Pan Am aircraft out of Frankfurt, Germany, that facilitated the placement of the bomb on Board Pan Am Flight 103.

• Justice Department retaliation against a former Mossad operative, who operated an international security company, and who prepared a report on how the bomb was placed on Pan Am Flight 103.

• Justice Department retaliation against a covert CIA operative who testified in federal court about the personnel involved in the operation known as October Surprise—which involved U.S. personnel paying bribes to Ira-nian terrorists to delay the release of the 52 American hostages held in Iran.

• Justice Department retaliation against me to halt my exposure of criminal activities that were inflicting great harm upon national interests, including national security. Information Before September 11 Was Ample To Order Overnight Protection Against Successful Takeover Of Aircraft By Hijackers You and your spokespersons state that the information was too vague prior

to September 11 to have taken preventative actions. That is not correct; it may have been too vague for some of the incompetents in key government posi-tions, but it was not too vague for competent people to have taken quick cor-rective actions to prevent hijackers from taking control of an aircraft.

The information that I have acquired, initially as a federal air safety in-spector and then over the years from my dozens of government agents, would have been a major block to the success of terrorist acts against the United States and its people. Large numbers of people in government misused their government positions to silence me and my government sources. To really this obstruction of justice through misuse of the FBI and the federal courts, have someone examine the following Internet site: www.defraudingamerica.com.

Additional Comments on Corruption Within the FAA The deep-seated misconduct within the FAA, which continues to this day,

included: • Warnings to federal air safety inspectors not to make reports of air safety

problems and air safety violations • Destruction of reports of major air safety problems, including hijackings. • Retaliation against inspectors who continued to make reports. • Retaliation against inspectors who exercised their responsibilities to take

corrective actions. • Massive fraud during a four-month-long hearing during which I acted as

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 319independent prosecutor, and much more.

• Felony cover-ups of the internal FAA corruption by the NTSB board members, which I documented while a federal air safety inspector, and is described in my books.

• Cover-ups by the FBI and U.S. Attorneys, when I brought these criminal activities to their attention while I was a federal air safety inspector.

• FAA harassment against the two federal air safety inspector who had ear-lier reported the criminal activities at United Airlines that resulted in a continuing series of fatal airline crashes, one of which was the world’s worst at that time.

• Justice Department prosecutors blocking my presentation of FAA corrup-tion to a federal grand jury in Denver, which I was a federal air safety in-spector.

• Justice Department preventing my presenting information and documenta-tion to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4). I made reports years ago on how the fatal hijackings could be easily and

inexpensively prevented, but the internal FAA problems prevented these preventative measures from being taken that could have prevented years of fatal hijackings. The collateral effects of the corruption and other problem areas caused the safety problems to continue, along with the deadly conse-quences. Other Areas Of Misconduct Insuring the Success

Of Past and Future Terrorism The following misconduct continues to aid and abet the success of terror-

ists, and is based upon information I personally discovered or evidence pro-vided to me by my many government sources: • Justice Department personnel retaliating against the head of a multi-

agency drug task force targeting the drug funding operations of Jersey City terrorists. By falsely charging the head of the multi-agency drug task force with criminally violating the civil rights of a suspected drug traf-ficker, the entire operation was shut down. The following year, in 1993, Jersey City terrorists, who received funds from the drug operation, bombed the World Trade Center.

• Justice Department personnel retaliating against a counter terrorist expert who discovered suitcase nuclear bombs being smuggled from Russia through Lithuania and sold to terrorists in the Middle East. The retaliation blocked discovery of how the nuclear devices were being removed from Russian arsenals, prevented discovery of the terrorist groups that had al-ready received the suitcase nuclear devices, and prevented measures to halt the transfer of nuclear devices and nuclear material to terrorist groups.

• Justice Department and CIA personnel who refused in 1995 to accept the offer of three dozen to 100 Stinger missiles that were offered by Afghani General Rashid Dostum. These negotiations were occurring in Los Ange-les, and included a friend and former head of a secret CIA operation based in Honolulu. The refusal of these surface-to-air missiles resulted in Mid-dle East terrorists acquiring an unknown quantity of them to use against U.S. aircraft. My letters to members of Congress concerning this matter


can be found at the following Internet site: www.defraudingamerica.com/missiles_specter_oct20.doc. • Justice Department retaliation against a contract agent for the Defense

Intelligence Agency when he prepared a declaration describing what he discovered about a CIA-DEA drug operation using Pan Am aircraft out of Frankfurt, Germany, that facilitated the placement of the bomb on Board Pan Am Flight 103.

• Justice Department retaliation against a former Mossad operator, who operated an international security company, and who prepared a report on how the bomb was placed on Pan Am Flight 103.

• Justice Department retaliation against a covert CIA operative who testified in federal court about the personnel involved in the operation known as October Surprise—which involved U.S. personnel paying bribes to Ira-nian terrorists to delay the release of the 52 American hostages held in Iran.

• Justice Department retaliation against me to halt my exposure of criminal activities that were inflicting great harm upon national interests, including national security. Obstruction of Justice by Justice Department and Federal Judges The federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 44 requires that any-

one knowing of a federal crime must promptly report it to a federal judge, or other federal officer. If they fail to do so, they become guilty of misprision of felony. I exercised this requirement to report the criminal activities adversely affecting national security to a federal judge, who must receive this evidence as part of his or her administrative duties.

My first attempts5 in the late 1970s and early 1980s were to report the crash-related FAA corruption and then to report felony cover-ups by the NTSB board members. Federal judges refused to receive the information after Justice Department personnel filed motions to block the reports. This Justice Depart-ment and judicial obstruction of justice resulted in a continuation of the cor-ruption within the FAA, which, as expected, was followed by more fatal air disasters caused or made possible by the deep-seated culture within the FAA.

Commencing in 1986, as an increasing number of other former and pre-sent government agents provided me inside information and documentation on other areas of criminal and even subversive activities6 I again sought to report these criminal activities to a federal judge. Again, federal judges, assisted by Justice Department prosecutors, blocked these reports and then criminally enlarged upon their obstruction of justice: • Federal judges issued unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently

barring me from access to the federal courts, which exist to this day. This is an unheard of violation of due process.

• When I discovered other criminal activities inflicting even greater harm to national security, I again sought to report these activities and present evi-dence to a federal court at San Francisco and Sacramento, California.

• Again, federal judges refused to receive the evidence. With the assistance of Justice Department prosecutors, they charged me with criminal con-

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 321tempt of court, seeking support in the orders permanently terminating my legal and constitutional right to federal court access. Federal judges de-nied me a jury trial, held that I was guilty of criminal contempt of court, and at the age of 69, shortly after I had open-heart surgery, federal judges and Justice Department personnel sent me to federal prison for six months, where I spent eight weeks in solitary confinement.

• Simultaneously, federal judges issued orders seizing and liquidating my home, my sole source of income, and property worth over $10 million. These orders were rendered without the legal and constitutional due proc-ess right of a hearing, notice of hearing, and legally required cause. And then other orders were rendered barring me from filing objections to the seizure and liquidation of my life assets. When I did exercise my legal and constitutional right to object, the filing was unfiled, and I was again charged with criminal contempt of court. I was denied a jury trial, denied my own funds to hire legal counsel, denied legal counsel, held guilty, and sentenced to federal prison. Obstruction of Justice Aiding Terrorism and Other Crimes The criminal activities that I and my group of other government agents

had discovered were expanded by the felony cover-ups of everyone who was made aware of these crimes. I had reported the deep-seated corruption within the FAA years ago, which were repeatedly followed by cover-ups. Other ex-amples: I sent warning letters to every member of the House and Senate intel-ligence committees about six months before the downing of TWA Flight 800, warning of surface-to-air missile attacks on commercial aircraft. These letters were based upon information and documentation received from one of my CIA sources. Despite the urgent need to contact me and my CIA source to halt the acquisition of these surface-to-air missiles, not a single congressional recipient responded. Several months later, a surface to air missile brought down TWA Flight 800, which was followed by continuation of NTSB cover-ups that I had documented while a federal air safety inspector and as described in Unfriendly Skies.

Warning letters were sent to members of Congress offering to provide tes-timony and evidence from me and my government sources about CIA drug smuggling into the United States. These sources included government insiders who either flew the drugs, or discovered the drug trafficking as part of their official duties. Not a single response, despite the enormous effect upon na-tional security and the lives and the deaths resulting from these criminal activi-ties.

Conditions Insuring the Success of the September 11 Hijackers Are Deeply Embedded in the Culture Within Government Obviously, the continuation of these corrupt activities and endemic cover-

ups played a key role in the success of the September 11 terrorist attacks and will play a key role in the success of future terrorist attacks—plus continue the tragedies arising from the other corruption that I sought to report. I have ample documentation to support what is stated in this letter. • The expected continuation of the prior cover-up will insure the continua-


tion of the corruption and the tragedies, just as happened following the years of prior déjà vu warnings that I provided to members of Congress and to federal judges. This letter can be found at various Internet sites, in-cluding www.defraudingamerica.com.

• Many more people in key government positions are criminally implicated in these matters, being one reason why no government check and balance will address the crimes against the United States.

• There is much more to this pattern of deep-seated misconduct within gov-ernment offices that played key roles in the success of the September 11 terrorists. Further information can be found in the books that I have writ-ten; at the Internet sites; at the 3000 locations listed by putting “Rodney Stich” in a google search engine, and by contacting me. This letter can be found on various Internet sites. Sincerely, Rodney Stich

ENDNOTES 1. One of these was the world’s worst air disaster at that time, occurring in

my area of federal air safety responsibilities, which occurred as a United Air-lines DC-8 crashed into Brooklyn, about one mile from where the World Trade Center was later built. Major corruption was responsible for that crash, and similar FAA corruption was responsible for the conditions that insured the success of the 9/11 terrorist hijackers.

2. Latest books are the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America and the first edition of Drugging America, with updates coming shortly.

3. Agents providing evidence were from the FBI, DEA, Customs, Secret Service and CIA.


5. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. de-nied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, viola-tions of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible re-

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 323peated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long stand-ing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Depart-ment of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other ac-tions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.

6. Many of these criminal activities are detailed in the books, Unfriendly Skies, Defrauding America, and Drugging America, and include such crimes as October Surprise;, massive drug smuggling by the CIA and other govern-ment entities; judicial corruption in the bankruptcy courts and the involvement of the CIA; financial fraud by the CIA in banks, savings and loans, and other financial institutions; and the felony cover-up of these crimes.

No response. Continuing to Put Supreme Court Justices on Notice After the tragedies of September 11, made possible by, among

many others, the corruption in the federal courts and the involvement of Supreme Court justices, I kept the Supreme Court justices aware of these matters. They knew for years the deadly consequences of the misconduct and their cover-ups relating to the crimes, but after Sep-tember 11, they could see the consequences were, as expected, of greater intensity. My January 2, 2002, letter was addressed to Justice Rehnquist but sent to each of the Supreme Court justices:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Current books: Defrauding America; Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com January 2, 2002 William Rehnquist, Chief Justice U.S. Supreme Court 1 First St, NE Washington, DC 20543 Certified: 7099 3400 0010 8179 3262

Ref: Making a record of judicial misconduct related to September 11, 2001, terrorists attacks

To Justice Rehnquist:

The purpose of this letter is to make another record referring to the docu-


mented judicial misconduct that blocked the reporting of corrupt and criminal activities that insured the success of the four groups of terrorist hijackers on September 11, 2001.

Ever since I was a federal air safety inspector, I sought to report to federal courts the felonies that played key roles in a long series of fatal airline crashes. These reports were required to be made to a federal judge by the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, and federal judges had a mandatory re-quirement under their administrative duties to receive such reports and related evidence.

Credibility and background: I am a former federal air safety inspector with a vast aviation background starting as a Navy pilot in World War II and airline captain for many years. I held federal responsibility for the most senior program at the world’s largest airline while a continuing series of major air disasters occurred in my area of immediate air safety responsibilities.

During my federal air safety duties I discovered and documented corrup-tion that played key roles in a series of fatal air disasters, one of which was an airliner crash into New York City that was the worlds worst at that time. The next aviation disaster affecting New York City, made possible by the same deeply engrained culture within the FAA, occurred on September 11, 2001. The continuing cover-up will continue the federal offenses and the conse-quences. A few highlights follow:

Endemic Crash-Related Corruption Within the FAA A series of fatal airline crashes due to hard-core corruption1 within the

FAA. The nature of these corrupt and criminal activities, which I have docu-mented, was accompanied by a refusal to allow federal air safety inspectors to carry out their federal air safety responsibilities, and the refusal to order the simple corrective measures that would have prevented hijackers from taking control of the aircraft. The refusal to take these legally required corrective ac-tions was a normal corollary to the hard-core corrupt and criminal activities that I documented.

Felony Cover-ups by NTSB NTSB board members repeatedly covered up for the FAA misconduct

when I and other federal inspectors reported these matters. These cover-ups by the politically appointed, board members were followed by falsification of official NTSB accident reports (due to omitting these facts which then changed the actual air safety problems and criminal violations related to the crashes).

Felony Cover-ups by Justice Department Lawyers Lawyers in the various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice con-

tinually covered up for these federal crimes, knowing that crashes and deaths would follow.

Felony Cover-ups by Members Of Congress Felony cover-ups by members of Congress that had oversight responsibili-

ties and responsibilities under federal criminal statutes. Records exist of the years of cover-ups by each of these members of Congress and other govern-ment personnel.

Felony Cover-ups by Large Numbers of Federal Judges The widespread cover-ups and obstruction of justice caused me to exer-

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 325cise the responsibilities under the federal crime reporting statutes2 to report the serious offenses to a federal court. Also, the rights provided by another seeking a judicial order forcing federal officials to perform a legal duty and halt their unlawful conduct.

Another requirement existed under Title 28 U.S.C. § 13613 to provide a court forum to determine if a court order was required to order federal officials to comply with the law and to halt illegal conduct. I filed these actions4 against the FAA and NTSB in the 1980s.

Federal judges blocked every attempt to report these federal crimes, de-spite the mandatory requirement to receive such information and evidence. These judicial obstruction of justice acts were followed by a series of espe-cially brutal air disasters that could have been prevented if the cover-up had not occurred. The judicial involvement now required continuation of the judi-cial obstruction of justice.

Obstructing Justice Relating to Other Criminal Activities As I attempted to circumvent the endemic corruption and its cover-up by

government checks and balances, and as my efforts became known, other gov-ernment agents5 provided me with information and hard evidence revealing the existence of other criminal activities gravely affecting the security of the United States and the lives of its people. These criminal activities included, for instance: • Drug smuggling into the United States by people acting under cover of

their government positions. These were subversive and treasonous activi-ties.

• Widespread corruption in the federal bankruptcy courts, especially the Ninth Circuit, involving federal judges, trustees, lawyers and law firms. I personally documented this corruption that continues to impoverish thou-sands of people.

• Other criminal activities described in federal filings in various U.S. dis-trict courts, including San Francisco and Sacramento. Reporting Additional Criminal Activities Again Blocked by Federal Judges Starting in 1986, I again attempted to report to a federal court these crimi-

nal activities, along with those directly involving aviation safety. I filed papers in the U.S. district courts at San Francisco and Sacramento seeking to report these matters. Federal judges6 again blocked the reporting of these criminal activities, which I brought to the attention of each of the Supreme Court Jus-tices.

Compounding Obstruction of Justice With Criminal Acts Against Former Federal Agent and Witness Federal judges compounded their obstruction of justice by issuing unlaw-

ful and unconstitutional orders barring me, for the remainder of my life, from filing any papers in the federal courts. These orders still exist, and have blocked me and my many government sources from reporting the criminal activities that continue to subvert the security of the United States.


Feloniously Misusing Federal Courts to Inflict Great Harm Upon Former Federal Agent and Witness As Part of Cover-ups As I continued to discover and obtain supporting evidence of additional

criminal activities. I exercised my responsibilities under the federal crime re-porting statute to report these matters and provide evidence to a federal court. Federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors, the same group that had for years blocked the reporting of these crimes, retaliated by charging me with criminal contempt of court (on the basis that federal judges had permanently barred me from federal courts). Justice Anthony Kennedy was directly impli-cated in these acts while a judge in the Ninth Circuit court of appeals. Retaliat-ing against a former federal agent and witness constitutes a federal crime.7

Six Months in Prison for Attempting to Report Criminal Activities Federal judges denied me a jury trial, and sentenced me to six months in

federal prison. I appealed this sentence to the Ninth Circuit court of appeals and filed petitions for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. Each of the Justices upheld the felony retaliation, the felony obstruction of justice, and corrupt misuse of the federal courts. The six months in prison included eight weeks in solitary confinement. (I was nearing 70 years of age at that time and had recently undergone a six-bypass open-heart surgery.)

While in prison, federal judges unlawfully, unconstitutionally, and cor-ruptly seized my $10 million in real estate assets (that funded my exposure of these criminal activities) and liquidated everything I owned, including my home and my sole source of income. In this way my attempts to report the wide pattern of criminal activities and criminal cover-ups could be expected to cease.

Supreme Court Justices Aware of These Judicial Crimes As shown in the federal filings made known to the Supreme Court, I noti-

fied the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court of these crimes, the tragic conse-quences, and of worse yet to occur—which did occur on September 11, and which will continue to occur, made possible by the cover-ups, including the obstruction of justice by Supreme Court Justices.

Supreme Court Justices had a legal and moral responsibility to intervene. The legal responsibilities arise under the federal crime reporting statutes (including the responsibility to receive information and evidence of the criminal activities), and the Justices’ supervisory responsibilities over the federal judges who not only obstructed justice, but feloniously retaliated against me for attempting to make such reports.

Instead of exercising this responsibility, Supreme Court Justices covered up, which allowed an escalation of the criminal activities, an escalation of the tragedies, and adverse effect upon national security. As expected, great trage-dies followed, including the success of the four groups of terrorists on Sep-tember 11. There will be more as federal judges and others must now continue their cover-ups to protect themselves against their prior criminal misconduct.

Consequences of Judicial Obstruction of Justice and Retaliation Among the many implications of these documented judicial acts are in-

cluded the following:


• Insured the continuation of the deep-seated corruption in the Federal Avia-tion Administration and its oversight entities, and insured the continuation of the related tragedies, including the September 11, 2001, terrorist acts.

• Insured the continuation of drug smuggling into the United States by peo-ple holding government positions, aided and abetted by people in gov-ernment checks and balance positions. This in turn insured the continua-tion of the murders, civil right violations, asset seizures, and other crimes generated by the drug smuggling. From 1986 through 1995, I was con-tinually charged with criminal contempt of court for my exercise of re-sponsibility to report criminal activities and for exercising rights and de-fenses guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States.

• Insured the continuation of the judicial corruption in the bankruptcy courts.

• Insured the success of judicial destruction of civil and constitutional rights, which accompanied the judicial acts to block my reporting of the criminal activities. Continuing Judicial Obstruction of Justice and Civil Rights Violations The latest attempt to report these criminal activities and to halt the judi-

cially inflicted civil rights violations upon me was my filing of a federal action in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada. Again, federal judges, including Ninth Circuit judges, blocked my reporting of criminal activities (including those that insured the success of the September 11 hijackers), and blocked my remedies against those who inflicted such great harm upon me.

Details of these criminal activities, including the specific obstruction of justice and retaliation by federal judges that I encountered the past 20 years, can be found in this lawsuit, in the books, Unfriendly Skies, Defrauding Amer-ica, and Drugging America, and on the following Internet sites: www.unfriendlyskies.com and www.defraudingamerica.com.

The evidence that is available reveals an advanced form of criminality in government, including the federal courts, up to and including the justices of the Supreme court. Fortunately for the guilty, the broadcast and print media have been implicated through cover-ups.

Since your prior involvement in these federal offenses has caused and en-abled to be inflicted such enormous harm upon the United States it will be necessary, as before, for you and the other justices to continue the cover-jps, with increasing harm to the United States. The only defense available to this misconduct and this harm is for a few members of the public to finally show some semblance of outrage and civic responsibility. Unfortunately for the country, this display of courage is highly questionable.



Copies to: Justices Stephen Breyer; Ruth Ginsburg; Anthony Kennedy; Sandra Day O’Connor; Antonin Scalia; David Souter; John Stevens; Clarence Thomas.

ENDNOTES

1. The documented FAA corruption included threats against federal air safety inspectors not to report major air safety problems and violations, crimi-nal falsification of forged air safety documents, retaliation against inspectors for continuing to make such reports or for attempting to take legally authorized and legally required corrective actions, perjury and fraud at FAA air safety hearings that were directly related to several immediate air disasters.


3. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

4. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. de-nied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, viola-tions of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible re-peated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long stand-ing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Depart-ment of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other ac-tions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.

5. Several dozen former and present government agents provided me with information and documentation on criminal activities involving federal per-sonnel. These agents included those from the FBI, DEA, Customs, CIA, in-cluding former heads of secret CIA airlines and CIA financial operations, who reported various forms of criminal activities against the United States.

6. Federal judges obstructing justice including Marilyn Patel, Milton Schwartz, Samuel Conti, David Levi, and others.

7. Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 35, 111, 153, 241, 242, 245(b)(1)(B), 246, 371, 1341, 1343, 1503, 1505, 1512, 1513(b), 1515(a).

8. Rodney Stich as plaintiff, civil action Nr. CV-N-00-0151-ECR-PHA


No response. Years of Cover-ups by ACLU For years, starting while I was a federal air safety inspector uncov-

ering massive corruption in government related to a series of airline crashes, I contacted the ACLU for help. I contacted them when I dis-covered and documented, and was a victim, of massive civil and consti-tutional violations that were intimately intertwined with the judicial efforts to block my reporting of major criminal activities affecting na-tional issues. Never once did they offer to help either me, or the subver-sion of the courts and the laws and Constitution of the United States. It had to be clear to them that these wrongful acts were resulting in deaths, in false arrests, and were undermining the security of the United States. One of my letters to the New York office of the ACLU follows:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Defrauding America, Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies Member Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association (LPBA) Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com

May 25, 2002

Donna Lieberman, Director, American Civil Liberties Union 125 Broad Street, 17th Floor New York, NY 10004-2400

Ref: Making another record of ACLU’s role in covering up for criminal and subversive crimes that insured the success of the September 11, 2001, terrorist hijackers, and those terrorist acts yet to occur

To Ms. Lieberman:

The purpose of this letter is to make a record, which will be on the Inter-

net, of how the ACLU has repeatedly, for years, covered up for massive crimi-nal and subversive activities, including the combination of unprecedented civil and constitutional violations to obstruct justice.

I first started reporting these matters to the ACLU while I held a major air safety position with the FAA responsible for correcting the conditions resulting in the worst series of air disasters in U.S. history. In my earlier letters to the ACLU I brought out the massive civil and constitutional violations being in-flicted upon me as part of a scheme to block the exposure of criminal and sub-versive activities that I and my group of other former and present government agents had discovered, and which were continuing to result in great harm upon


national interests and the lives, and deaths, of many people. I brought to the ACLU’s attention the subversive actions by California and

federal judges, working with a CIA-front law firm—an active member of the ACLU—and other judicial acts subverting the courts and the laws and Consti-tution of the United States. I described to the ACLU the documented pattern of unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring me from federal (and California) courts, which terminated for me, for the remainder of my life, the legal rights, legal protections, and legal defenses that are guaranteed to everyone else, even terrorists and murders. I showed how these record setting violations of substantive and procedural due process were combined to ob-struct government agents from reporting criminal and subversive activities that continued to inflict great harm upon national security and upon the lives and the deaths of many victims.

Obviously, we had an ongoing documented scheme that not only sub-verted national security, but also subverted the courts and the laws and Consti-tution of the United States. And this was done with the aid and comfort of the ACLU. Arguably, the ACLU could be sued for aiding and abetting the criminal and subversive acts that insured the success of the September 11 hijackers and the terrorism that has yet to occur. For the record of those who are viewing this letter on the Internet, I provide a few highlights:

First, I am a former federal investigator, who, with a group of several dozen present and former government agents and deep-cover operatives, has sought to report high-level corruption in government. In an attempt to circum-vent the cover-ups of these matters, I published several highly detailed and documented books in an attempt to inform the public of these matters, and also to motivate groups, such as the ACLU, to exercise their moral and legal re-sponsibilities.

The pattern of judicial violations of civil rights described in part in this letter are well documented in court records. Although these gregarious civil liberty violations were directed at me, the important issue is that the courts were made into a corrupt vehicle to carry them out, and that the same can be done to anyone. The pattern of civil rights violations started out with a sham lawsuit filed against me. This lawsuit was filed after my exposure of high-level government corruption escalated. The carry out the lawsuit, civil right protec-tions had to be violated, and these violations escalated to an unprecedented number and level in the courts.

A few of the serious civil rights violations involving the misuse of judicial positions and the courts are listed here: • Judicial orders barring me for the remainder of my life from federal court

access, and the federal protections specific for the wrongful acts inflicted upon me. (These are obviously unlawful and unconstitutional orders, in-tended to block my legal defenses.)

• Judicial orders barring me from reporting federal crimes that I sought to report under the clearly worded crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4. (These orders obstructed justice and violated various federal criminal statutes, as they obstructed justice.)


• Federal judges charging me with criminal contempt of court after I exer-cised federal remedies under the Civil Rights Act and declaratory judg-ment statutes (which I combined with a Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4 report-ing of criminal activities). (This pattern of retaliation constitutes criminal acts under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 241 and Sections 1505, 1512, and 1513.)

• Sentenced to six months in prison, at the age of 66, denied a jury trial, in retaliation for exercising the rights to procedural due process for massive civil and constitutional violations and for reporting criminal and subver-sive activities that continued to inflict great harm upon the United States and its people—the latest occurring on September 11.

• Forced to seek relief in Chapter 11 court from the civil rights violations, compounded by the judicial revocation of major civil and constitutional protections, and further compounded by the threat of prison if I exercised these “protected” civil rights.

• Chapter 11 judge then signed two orders seizing my assets, carrying out the original intent of stripping me of the assets that funded my exposure activities. The orders seizing my life’s assets violated the statutory and constitutional requirements for a noticed hearing, the requirement of a hearing, the requirement for legally recognized cause. Further, they were signed after the judge had signed an order refusing to accept jurisdiction, which had never been rescinded. The orders were therefore signed without personal and without subject matter jurisdiction, making them void orders.

• An order was then signed barring me from objecting to the seizure and liquidation of my assets. When I filed objections, I was then charged with criminal contempt of court. I was denied an lawyer, I was denied the right to testify in my own defense, and then held guilty by Oakland Chapter 11 judge Edward Jellen, and sentenced to federal prison. That sentence was never carried out, as Chapter 11 judges had no authority to sentence any-one to prison on contempt of court charges.

• Corruptly seeking to support orders permanently terminating my civil and constitutional rights to defend by reversing the legal definition of frivo-lous and calling my exercise of procedural due process against the record-setting violations of state and federal laws and constitutional protections to be frivolous defenses.

• The series of criminal contempt-of-court charges were in continuous ef-fect from 1987 to 1995. Civil Rights Violations Combined with Obstruction of Justice These judicial attacks repeatedly violated fundamental and important con-

stitutional protections. These attacks followed my attempts to expose high-level corruption that I discovered while a federal investigator for the Federal Aviation Administration. Briefly, the San Francisco law firm filed the lawsuit that was barred by blocks of California and federal statutes, related decisional law, rules of court, and fundamental rights and protections in the Constitution.


California judges repeatedly violated these protections in law, and then com-pounded these violations by violating procedural remedies. Every appeal to higher courts in California was ineffective. Only California Supreme Court justice Stanley Mosk supported my objections to the violations being perpe-trated.

I then exercised federal remedies under the Civil Rights Act for the docu-mented civil rights violations and under the declaratory judgment statutes to have a federal judge declare my personal and property rights legally estab-lished in seven judgments. Again, federal judges refused to act despite their responsibility to do so.

The ACLU claims that its goals are to protect civil rights. In this convo-luted series of continuous judicially perpetrated violations of civil liberties, a pattern is revealed that is far more serious than any case the ACLU has taken in the past. The pattern shows the willingness of judges to convert their posi-tions and the courts into a corrupt arm of government. Making matters even worse, the civil rights violations were closely tied in with obstruction of justice for criminal activities.

Although a federal lawsuit would be relatively straight forward, there is much more to all this. I have written books exposing much of the criminal activities and judicial corruption (Third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies, and first edition of Drugging America.) I also have web sites that make reference to some of these matters.

The specific civil rights violations, and the underlying judicial mentality that willingly repeated them, can be addressed in a single lawsuit that must be filed by March 25, 2000. It was on approximately March 25, 1999, that Judge Jellen held the final hearing on the Chapter 11 cases, and the one-year statute of limitations started to run on a federal lawsuit under the Civil Rights Act, Bivens, and civil RICO. That Chapter 11 case is tied in with the 17-year con-tinuous and inter-related pattern of civil rights violations and judicial fraud and provides the vehicle for addressing the entire sordid matter. This is an un-precedented opportunity to get to the heart of some of the worst cases of civil rights violations.

Harm Upon America Will Continue and Escalate I wrote to the ACLU several years ago stating, “Your group is sufficiently

sophisticated to know that failure to provide assistance will make possible the continuation of the pattern of corruption in the courts and other government entities, and that the harm upon the people will continue and even escalate, as I have documented during the past 40 years.” Now that 3,000 people have died, made possible by the Trojan horse corruption in government, and the courts, in only one day’s events, the ACLU now has an even greater self-serving inter-ests in continuing to cover up for the crimes against the United States and its people.

The ACLU continued cover-up of these major crimes against the United States will continue the tragic consequences, of which September 11 is only one of an endless number of tragedies suffered by the American people from the corruption and its cover-ups that insures the success of repeated terrorist

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 333acts, some of which will undoubtedly be worse than September 11.


From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203 Author of Defrauding America, Drugging America, Unfriendly Skies, Terrorism Against America, Lawyers and Judges—American Trojan Horses Association Former Intelligence Officers Association of National Security Alumni International Society of Air Safety Investigators Lawyers Pilots Bar Association Former FAA air safety investigator Former airline captain and Navy pilot E-mail: [email protected] Google.com search engine: “Rodney Stich” www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com

February 6, 2003

Justice William Rehnquist U.S. Supreme Court 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20532 Certified mailing: 7002 0860 0003 9592 6368

Ref: Making another record of federal judges blocking reports of criminal activities discovered by former government agents, including primary blame for success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.1

To William Rehnquist: The purpose of this letter is to again make a record of the continuing

documented criminal acts taken by federal judges that are blocking the reports of criminal activities. In this manner they are committing felonies through violation of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4,2 and those arising under their obstruction of justice that violate additional federal stat-utes.3 In addition, their continuing retaliation against a former federal aviation safety agent and witness, as they seek to silence him, violates additional fed-eral criminal statutes.4 All of these documented serious offenses have been occurring in plain sight of the supervisory responsibilities of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court, who also have vicarious liability for these wrongful acts.

Criminal Activities With Close Links To Events Of September 11, 2001 These charges against federal judges affect national security. The miscon-

duct described in this letter has played key roles in numerous national trage-dies, including those of September 11, 2001. These are serious charges, made by a former federal aviation safety agent with impeccable credentials and credibility,5 which cannot be simply ignored.


Initial Discovery Of Criminal Activities In Aviation Safety Offices My initial discovery of deep-seated corruption in government aviation

safety offices occurred after I was given the assignment to correct the condi-tions causing the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history.6 The arrogance and deep-seated corruption associated with the deadly consequences caused me to act as an independent prosecutor within the FAA. During this six-month period I brought into a hearing record thousands of pages of sworn testimony and additional government documents showing the relationship be-tween the corrupt activities and the resulting airline crashes and deaths.

Primary Reason Why Unprecedented Absence Of Public Investigation Of 9/11 My investigative work shows that this culture of corruption continues to

this date, continues to periodically surface in certain preventable aviation crashes, and definitely has primary blame for the success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001. Forty years of prior fatal hijackings and inspector reports urging the simple preventative measures were repeatedly blocked because of major internal problems within the FAA.

Initial Attempts To Report Criminal Affecting Aviation Safety The continuation of airline crashes7 from known safety problems and

safety violations caused me to take various steps to bring a halt to these serious problems. I left government service, refusing to work under these corrupt conditions, and filed the first of several federal lawsuits8 in the late 1970s and early 1980s, seeking to report the corrupt and criminal activities that had been responsible for many of the airline crashes occurring in my direct and indirect areas of responsibilities. The authority for these lawsuits were the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, and the statute permitting any citi-zen to seek a court order requiring government officials to perform a manda-tory duty and to halt unlawful conduct, Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361.9

These included: (a) cover-up of major air safety violations and criminal acts involving major air disasters at a politically powerful airline; (b) repeated refusal to take legally required corrective actions when reported by the profes-sional federal air safety inspectors; (c) felony destruction of inspector reports revealing major air safety problems, air safety violations, and criminal falsifi-cation of records, while the same problems were resulting in a 20-year-long period of air disasters; (d) threats to inspectors not to file reports of these prob-lems; (e) retaliation against federal air safety inspectors when they continued to file reports of major safety problems and violations, perpetrated while the same problems were resulting in a series of fatal airline crashes; (f) and con-spiracy to commit these offenses.

Start Of Federal Judges Blocking Reports Of Criminal Activities Initially, federal district and appellate judges admitted the gravity of my

charges. But they refused to receive the evidence on the argument that (a) these were matters for Congress, and (b) I had no standing to bring these mat-ters to the federal courts.10 The federal crime reporting statute and the right of any citizen to force federal officials to perform a mandatory duty contradicted those holdings. The crashes and the deaths from these problems continued, as expected.

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 335Circumventing the Obstruction Of Justice By Federal Judges and Prosecutors Seeking to circumvent this additional level of cover-up, I authored and

published the first in a series of books11 seeking to inform the public of these serious matters. The first book was the first of multiple editions of Unfriendly Skies. I started appearing as guest and expert on radio and television shows12

seeking to inform and motivate the public to show some signs of citizen re-sponsibility relating to these matters. The specific crashes made possible by this misconduct are detailed in my book, Unfriendly Skies, with the latest fourth edition including the misconduct that made possible the events of Sep-tember 11, 2001.

Other Government Agents Provided Evidence o Far Worse Criminality The publicity arising from my several thousand radio and television

appearances and authoring of books13 provided publicity causing, over a period of fifteen years, several dozen other former and present government agents14 to contact me with information and documentation on the criminal activities that they discovered in government offices. These included, as examples: • Drug smuggling operations involving federal officials and other federal

personnel in covert operations. Details and documentation of these matters are found in the books, Defrauding America and Drugging America, and includes hundreds of pages of supporting evidence and statements from those who flew the drugs, affidavits, government documents, that clearly show the Trojan horse subversion of the United States and its people. These were clearly subversive activities.

• Misconduct adversely affecting national security matters. Evidence that I have acquired over the years from government insiders reveals govern-ment officials blocking the reports of surface-to-air missile sales, suitcase nuclear bomb sales, reports of moles in the FBI and CIA, and many other matters relating to national security. Some of these matters are destined to inflict catastrophic harm upon the United States—just as corruption and its cover-up made possible the 3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001.

• Widespread corruption in the bankruptcy courts. This heavily documented corruption involving federal judges, federal trustees, lawyers, corruptly strips people of their assets after the people exercise the statutory protec-tions of Chapter 11. The bankruptcy courts have also been made into a racketeering enterprise, also defrauding the United States.

• Secretly funding key politicians through covert CIA operations. I have acquired information from former CIA insiders, including heads of secret CIA proprietaries, of the CIA secretly funding bank accounts for several well-known politicians. The details, including the names of several well-known politicians, are in the various books, especially Defrauding Amer-ica.

• Many other corrupt activities, including the massive drug smuggling in the Contra affair, the bribing of Iranian terrorists to delay the release of American hostages, CIA involvement in looting the savings and loans, and much more.


Again Blocked From Reporting These Criminal Activities As I continued discovering evidence of major criminal activities, I again

commenced, in 1986, exercising the mandatory responsibilities to report these federal crimes to a federal judge as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4. The clear word-ing of that statute places a mandatory responsibility upon any federal judge (or other federal officer such as a member of Congress) to receive information and evidence offered. This is part of a judge’s administrative duties.

In every instance, federal district and appellate judges, and even the jus-tices of the U.S. Supreme Court, blocked the reports being made. These docu-mented obstruction of justice acts protected those who were guilty of great crimes against the United States.

Expanding on Efforts To Circumvent Massive Cover-ups Throughout Government In an attempt to circumvent the widespread cover-ups and inform the pub-

lic of these various forms of serious criminal activities, I used the vast amount of insider evidence to publish multiple editions of the following books: Un-friendly Skies, Defrauding America, Drugging America, Terrorism Against America, Lawyers and Judges—American Trojan Horses, and Disavow.

Federal Judges Combined Obstruction Of Justice With Felony Retaliation Against Me Commencing in 1986, as I and my group of other former and present gov-

ernment agents attempted to report the escalating series of criminal activities, federal judges blocked the reports by immediately dismissing the federal fil-ings. Several district and appellate court judges15 then sought to prevent me from even attempting to report the criminal and subversive activities by issu-ing unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring me access to federal district and appellate courts. These acts blocking the reporting of criminal activities in government offices, and the complicity of cover-ups, were followed by other federal crimes.16

Starting in 1987, federal judges court17 and Justice Department prosecu-tors started retaliation18 against me and took parallel actions19 misusing federal courts to halt my exposure activities, which were funded by my $10 million in real estate assets. They charged me with criminal contempt of court in retalia-tion for seeking to report the criminal activities through federal filings under the federal crime reporting statute and the right of any citizen to seek relief from these offenses.

Felony Retaliation Against Former Federal Agent and Witness After CIA and other government agents provided me with details of other

criminal activities, including drug smuggling, I again sought to carry out my responsibilities under 18 U.S.C. § 4. I filed papers in federal courts to report these matters. Instead of receiving the reports, federal judges and Justice De-partment prosecutors charged me with criminal contempt of court. They sought to support these charges by stating that for the remainder of my life I have been barred from filing any papers in the district of appellate courts, and therefore I was guilty of criminal contempt of court (for exercising legal and constitutional due process rights and reporting criminal activities in which they had become implicated).

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 337It is a crime to retaliate against anyone seeking to report a federal crime,

and even worse when the retaliation is against a former federal agent and wit-ness seeking to report criminal activities that have left a trail of deaths and great harm to national security issues.

These obviously unlawful and unconstitutional orders would halt me and my group from reporting criminal activities and block me from exercising fed-eral defenses20 against the simultaneous sham lawsuits21 filed by CIA-front law firms seeking to terminate my financial ability to continue these exposure efforts. In this way they blocked me from reporting the misconduct in govern-ment offices that was the primary blame for the success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.

Sampling Of Recent Lawsuits With Major Links To Events of September 11, 2001 Recent lawsuits, in which I sought to report the criminal activities, includ-

ing those enabling 19 hijackers to seize four airliners, are listed in reverse or-der: • Post 9/11 lawsuit22 filed in the U.S. district court, Washington, D.C., seek-

ing to report criminal activities23 that I and other government agents dis-covered. In clear violation of the federal crime reporting statute (and due process filing rights), U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy unlawfully dis-missed the action shortly after it was filed. Kennedy sought to support his dismissal (and refusal to receive evidence relating to the events of Sep-tember 11, 2001), by citing a 1991 order by Judge Stanley Sporkin that permanently barred me from filing any papers in federal courts. That unlawful and unconstitutional order effectively blocked the reporting of criminal activities that I and my group sought to report in 1991.

• District of Columbia appellate judges24 enlarged on these criminal and civil rights violations. Following Kennedy’s dismissal of the action seek-ing to report the criminal activities, I filed a timely notice of appeal25 and prepared to file an appeal brief. The issues raised on appeal would include (a) the mandatory requirements of Judge Kennedy to receive the reports of criminal activities as part of his administrative duties; (b) the many legal and constitutional due process rights to federal court access (c) the crimi-nal act of blocking the reporting of criminal and subversive activities; (d) the right to argue the illegal, unconstitutional, and void nature of Judge Sporkin’s 1991 order, and Judge Kennedy’s upholding of the order and other due process violations.

• District of Columbia appellate judges Ginsburg, Sentelle and Randolph issued an order (January 16, 2003) dismissing the appeal before the appeal brief could be filed. They claimed that the 1991 order by former U.S. dis-trict judge (and former CIA legal counsel) Stanley Sporkin terminated my right to federal court access, even though this right is guaranteed to all citizens by the laws and Constitution of the United States. (Even murder-ers and terrorists have this right, but not any government agents reporting major criminal activities implicating people holding key government posi-tions!)

• I then filed a petition for rehearing en banc with the U.S. court of appeals,


which was stamped “received” on January 27, 2003. Because of the grav-ity of the judicial corruption and its effect upon national security, includ-ing the events of September 11, 2001, and the widespread cover-ups else-where, it is expected that the District of Columbia appellate judges will continue the criminal cover-up and termination of due process rights guar-anteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States. Concurrent Judicial Cover-up By Judges In New York City Federal Courts

• Post 9/11 lawsuit submitted to the U.S. district court, New York City. On August 8, 2002, I submitted for filing a comparable lawsuit to the U.S. district court for the Southern District of New York in New York City. This court would be especially appropriate to receive the information be-cause of the huge death toll on September 11, 2001, from events that were made possible by obvious failures in the government’s aviation safety of-fices. Further, a prior catastrophic aviation disaster into New York City years earlier, the world’s worst at that time, was one of the airline crashes that caused the FAA to give me the assignment to correct the conditions resulting in the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history. The same corruption that I discovered and documented played key roles in both air disasters. Unless exposed, these deep-seated conditions would continue to allow major aviation disasters to occur, as on 9/11.

• To this date, letters sent to Chief Judge Michael Murasey and clerks James Parkison and Michael McMahon demanding that my papers be filed have failed to bring this about. Instead, the only responses during the past seven months were that the filing is “undergoing judicial review.” Federal law requires immediate filing of complaints when the papers meet certain minimum requirements and the filing fees are paid. This is clear obstruc-tion of justice showing contempt for the 3,000 victims killed nearby on September 11, 2001.

• Pre 9/11 lawsuit filed in Reno, Nevada,26 seeking to report criminal activi-ties, some of which subsequently made possible the success of 19 hijack-ers on September 11, 2001. That lawsuit stated and sought to provide data and evidence relating to ongoing corruption that I and a group of other former and present government agents sought to report to a federal court. Some of these areas of corruption made possible the events of September 11, which very possibly could have been prevented if the judicial cover-ups had not existed. That lawsuit also sought to defend against the sham legal efforts used to halt my exposure activities for which federal reme-dies for these federal causes of actions existed.27 U.S. district judge Ed-ward C. Reed blocked the reporting of these criminal activities, unlaw-fully dismissed the lawsuit, and then ordered me to pay several thousand dollars in sanctions for attempting to report the criminal activities and for attempting to defend against record-setting violations of federally pro-tected rights.

• Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continued the multiple federal crimes. Af-ter Reed dismissed the filing, I filed a timely notice of appeal, paid the fil-

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 339ing fees, and prepared to submit appeal briefs. Ninth Circuit judges Browning, Kleinfeld, and Gould, refused to receive the appeal briefs on the claim that in 1991 district judge Samuel Conti has issued an order bar-ring me from filing any papers in the appeal court. It was Ninth Circuit district and appellate judges that initiated the obstruction of justice tactics in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which made possible many fatal airline disasters arising from the corruption that I documented as a federal avia-tion safety agent. Complicity by Members of Congress Heavily implicated in these criminal activities through cover-ups were

many members of Congress. Starting while I was a key federal aviation safety agent, I repeatedly advised them of the criminal activities in government of-fices, the resulting consequences, and reminded them of their responsibilities as members of Congress and under various criminal statutes. Initially, some sympathized and admitted the gravity of what I had discovered, but refused to receive the information,28 refused to conduct any hearings, and covered up for the corruption that has greatly escalated over the years.

Lawsuits Against Members of Congress to Document Their Cover-ups In 1990 I filed two federal lawsuits29 against several members of Con-

gress,30 charging them with cover-ups and obstruction of justice relating to the corrupt and criminal activities that I and several dozen other former govern-ment agents had discovered and brought to their attention. The primary pur-pose of the lawsuit was to make a judicial record of the charges and their re-sponse. In their response, they admitted knowing of my charges of criminal and subversive activities. They admitted they did nothing in reaction to my charges. They claimed they were absolutely immune from the consequences of their acts, which included misprision of felonies, criminal cover-ups, and ob-struction of justice.

Years of Cover-ups by Justice Department Personnel Repeatedly implicated were Justice Department personnel whose 40 years

of cover-ups, started while I was a federal agent, and then expanded into mis-using Justice Department offices to retaliate against me for seeking to report the criminal and subversive activities, including those that resulted in 3,000 deaths on September 11.

Probable Reason for the Unprecedented Absence of Open Investigation Into 9/11 The criminal involvement of so many people in key government offices

explains the probable reason for the unprecedented refusal to conduct a public investigation into the deaths of 3,000 people on September 11, 2001.

Those Who Cover Up Or Do Nothing Become Complicit In the Crimes and Consequences The gravity of these charges, and the close relationship between the

documented facts and the many resulting tragedies does not permit anyone receiving this letter, or knowing of its contents, doing nothing, or engaging in the usual cover-up. The pathetic failure of people in the past to act on these matters has permitted the events of September 11 to occur, and the many other


national and personal tragedies. This letter is sent to the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and to those

listed below. The Supreme Court justices are so pathetically implicated that they will do nothing but expand on the cover-ups. But for the others, you are on notice of these charges. Most of the judicial corruption can be easily cor-roborated. The initial investigation should be on that aspect of this national scandal and how these judicial crimes covered up for the other areas of corrup-tion that played a primary role enabling 19 hijackers to seize four airliners.

This is no time for phony cover-up patriotism. Time is long overdue for courage, idealism, and true patriotism. I am now 80 years old, and have fought a David versus Goliath battle for 40 years with evidence of hardcore corrup-tion inflicting great harm upon America and its people. It is now time for oth-ers to show some courage and patriotism. I and my group have accumulated ample evidence to prove the peril facing the United States from thugs in key government positions.

Everyone who receives this letter who does nothing, or engages in more cover-ups, becomes complicit with the guilty and shares in the responsibility for future consequences. They also show contempt for the 3,000 victims of September 11, 2001, whose fate was made possible by the underlying corrup-tion that we documented and the criminal cover-ups, criminal obstruction of justice, and criminal retaliation by large number s of federal judges.


cc: • Supreme Court Justices William Rehnquist, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Gins-

burg, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia, David Souter, John Stevens, Clarence Thomas.

• Senators Charles Grassley, Patrick Leahy, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, John McCain, Joseph Lieberman, Rodham Clinton, Charles Schumer, Bob Graham, Richard Shelby, Bob Graham, Tom Daschle, Kay Bailey Hut-chinson.

• Representatives Porter Gross, Jerrold Nadler, Thomas Delay, John Mica, Thomas Delay, Martin Frost, Richard Armey, Dennis Hastert.

• Norman Mineta, Department of Transportation; Tom Ridge, Homeland Security Department; Dick Chaney, Vice President.

• District Attorney New York Robert Morganthau; Desiree Thompson, White House assistant to President George Bush.

• Publishers, New York Times (Arthur Sulzberger), Christian Science Moni-tor (Paul Van Slambrouch); Publisher Wall Street Journal (Karen House); Publisher Christian Science Monitor.

• Law firms with aviation lawsuits: Speiser and Krause (140 East 45, 34th Floor, NY 10017-3144); Kreindler & Kreindler (100 Park Ave., New York, NY); Ronald Motley (POB 1792, Mt. Pleasant, SC 29465), Baum,

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 341Hedlund (12100 Wilshire Blvd, # 950, Los Angles, CA); ACLU Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlick; ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser, Execu-tive Director, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004-2400.

ENDNOTES 1. The corruption enabling 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on September

11, 2001, existed in several sources, but primarily within the government’s aviation safety offices.


3. Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals. (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3. Accessory after the fact. Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States had been committed, receives, re-lieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an infor-mant── (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading con-duct toward another person, with intent to ──(1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding: shall be fined ... or im-prisoned ... or both. [1988 amended reading]

4. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for──(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or pos-sible commission of a Federal offense.

5. I was a Navy patrol plane commander and pilot instructor in World War II. I was an airline captain for many years after that war. I joined the FAA as a federal aviation safety agent and was eventually given the assignment to correct the conditions causing the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history. The deep-seated corruption that I discovered in the FAA caused me to act as an independent prosecutor for six months, during which I forced into the hearing records the testimony of many people and added considerably more documentation. I began obtaining evidence of cover-ups by NTSB board members, which continued the corruption and made possible continuation of the fraud-related air disasters. Since about 1985, other former and present government agents started providing me


information and evidence of corruption and criminal activities in other government offices that were inflicting great harm upon national security. As a private citizen I had acquired over $10 million in real estate, which I then used to fund my attempts to expose the criminal and subversive ac-tivities that I and a group of other former government agents had discov-ered.

6. These details are found in my book, Unfriendly Skies. 7. I detail and document these fraud-related airline crashes in the book, Un-

friendly Skies. 8. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied,

434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to re-port safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline acci-dent reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making pos-sible repeated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus cu-riae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litiga-tion, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District Califor-nia.)(addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Department of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other actions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.

9. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any ac-tion in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

10. This secondary argument was raised by Justice Department lawyers who repeatedly sought to prevent me from reporting these and even more seri-ous criminal activities.

11. The purpose of the books was to circumvent the vast cover-ups and in-form the public of the crimes perpetrated against them by people in gov-ernment offices. Authoring and publishing these books were a non-profit operation funded by my $10 million in real estate assets.

12. Over 3,000 appearances on radio and television shows since 1978. 13. The purpose of the books was to circumvent the vast cover-ups and in-

form the public of the crimes perpetrated against them by people in gov-ernment offices. Authoring and publishing these books were a non-profit operation funded by my $10 million in real estate assets.

14. Government agents providing me with insider information and documen-tation during the past fifteen years include agents of the FBI, CIA, DEA, ONI, Customs, Secret Service, INS, and others, including state law en-forcement personnel, former drug smugglers and former Mafia figures.

15. Federal judges issuing injunctions permanently terminating my rights to federal court access including Samuel Conti, Stanley Sporkin (former CIA

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 343legal counsel), Milton Schwartz, Marilyn Patel, and others.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 35. A party who conveys false information, knowing it to be false, knowing an attempt or alleged attempt being made that would be a crime under Chapter 97 or 111, which pertain to aircraft and motor vehi-cles. [This violation especially applies to the documented false information made by FAA personnel during an FAA hearing conducted by Rodney Stich.]

Title 18 U.S.C. § 111. Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain offi-cers or employees. (a) In general.–Whoever– (1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 114 of this title [federal agent] while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties; or (2) forcibly assaults or intimidates any person who formerly served as a person designated in section 1114 on account of the performance of official duties during such person’s term of service, shall, where the acts in violation of this section constitute only simply assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and in all other cases, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1114. Protection of officers and employees of the United States.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 153. Embezzlement by trustee or officer. Whoever knowingly and fraudulently appropriates to his own use, embezzles, spends, or transfers any property or secretes or destroys any document be-longing to the estate of a debtor which came into his charge as trustee ... shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both. [This statute applies to the trus-tees who liquidated Stich’s assets on the basis of the void orders issued by federal judges Robert Jones and Edward Jellen.]

Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Conspiracy against rights of citizens. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citi-zen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... They shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both;

Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law. Who-ever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person … to the deprivation of any rights, privi-leges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishment, pains, or penalties, on ac-count of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; (check if this has been ap-plied against a group, such as whistleblowers).

Title 18 U.S.C. § 245. Federally protected activities. ((b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force will-fully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimi-date or interfere with–(1) Any person because he is or has been, or in or-der to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons [whistleblower, witness, informant] from–(B) participating in or enjoying


any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;

Title 18 U.S.C. § 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States. If two or more persons conspire either to commit any of-fense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof, in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... [The United States was defrauded by the ac-tions of the judges, including blocking the reporting of criminal activities; retaliating against a former federal agent and witness for attempting to re-port criminal acts; subverting the laws and constitution of the United States through corrupt misuse of federal courts and judicial positions.]

16. Title 18 U.S.C. 1346. Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud” For the purpose of this chapter, the term “scheme or artifice to defraud” includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest ser-vices.

17. Federal judges involved in these charges include Milton Schwartz, Raul Ramirez, Marilyn Patel, David Levi, John Moulds (magistrate), and in-cluded Judge.

18. The judicial criminal retaliation took several forms: (1) repeatedly, from 1986 through 1995, federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors charged me with criminal contempt of court for exercising the responsibil-ity to report hardcore criminal activities to a federal judge. One of these federal prosecutions was in the U.S. district court at Sacramento, Califor-nia, action number CR S-87-124 JFM and were the direct result of filing papers seeking to report these crimes.

19. In addition to charging me with criminal contempt of court for reporting criminal and subversive activities in key government offices and covert government activities, the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross (San Francisco) filed a sham lawsuit against me targeting the $10 million in assets that funded my exposure activities. Federal judges then violated every relevant defense that I had, protecting the CIA-front law firm and the scheme. Eventually, my assets were seized and liquidated, orders rendered barring me from objecting, and when I did file objections, Oakland federal judge Edward Jellen charged me with criminal contempt of court and sentenced me to federal prison. (There is much more to all this.)

20. Federal defenses against the massive numbers of violations of federally protected rights included the Civil Rights Act, Biven, civil RICO, Declara-tory Judge Act, Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2201, FTCA, and others. Every defense was denied to me by federal judges who were concurrently block-ing my reports of the criminal activities. The latest such scheme is in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada (# CV-N-02-0039-LRH).

21. Parallel legal efforts, which involved federal judges, included seizing the $10 million of my life assets that funded my exposure activities. These orders violated the legal and constitutional requirement of a hearing, no-tice of hearing, or legally recognized cause. Then, orders were rendered

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 345barring me from filing objections. When I did file objections, federal judge Edward Jellen charged me with criminal contempt of court. Another legal tactic was a sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm of Fried-man, Sloan and Ross (San Francisco) which violated dozens of state and federal laws, followed by repeated violation of every federal defense. These multiple legal tactics acted to block the reporting of criminal and subversive activities that had a deadly effect for many, and an awesome effect upon major national interests.

22. U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, 02cv01172, filed June 12, 2002. 23. Among the deeply entrenched documented criminal activities within the

FAA were (a) cover-up of major air safety violations and criminal acts in-volving major air disasters at a politically powerful airline; (b) repeated refusal to take legally required corrective actions when reported by the professional federal air safety inspectors; (c) felony destruction of inspec-tor reports revealing major air safety problems, air safety violations, and criminal falsification of records, while the same problems were resulting in a 20-year-long period of air disasters; (d) threats to inspectors not to file reports of these problems; (e) retaliation against federal air safety inspec-tors when they continued to file reports of major safety problems and vio-lations, perpetrated while the same problems were resulting in a series of fatal airline crashes. And much more.

24. District of Columbia appellate judges blocking the reports were Chief judge Ginsburg, Sentelle, and Randolph.

25. District of Columbia appeal number 02-5240. 26. Reno lawsuit filed in 2000. 27. Federal remedies available for the multiple violations of federally pro-

tected rights included the Civil Rights Act, Declaratory Judgment Act, Bivens, Civil RICO, FTCA, among others.

28. Members of Congress meet the definition under of “officer” under 18 U.S.C. § 4 for responsibility to receive information of federal crimes.

29. Lawsuit against members of Congress, U.S. district court, Washington, DC, # 89-0170 SS. Placed under seal by U.S. district judge Stanley Sporkin, former CIA legal counsel.

30. Defendant members of Congress listed as defendants included Senators Edward Kennedy, Ernest Hollings, Albert Gore, Pete Wilson, Strom Thurmond; representatives Joseph Biden, Jack Brooks, John Conyers, Harley Staggers and Henry Gonzalez. Another similar lawsuit was filed under No. 89-85 and named among others, Representative Norman Mi-neta, who was appointed to head the Department to Transportation after his prior cover-up made possible the conditions enabling 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001. These are just samples of the letters I sent seeking to provide in-

sider information on matters that, if only a fraction were true, were ex-tremely serious and would continue in effect the conditions responsible for 9/11. No meaningful response was ever received, continuing what I


encountered for the past 30 years trying to provide evidence of hard-core corruption in government offices affecting various major national interests.

Example of Media Hypocrisy In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, a Wall Street

Journal article (January 9, 2002) by its publisher, Peter R. Kann, cover-ing half the page and labeled, Letter From the Publisher, stated:

This progress report carries forward a custom begun 25 years ago. It reflects our belief that publishing a newspaper is a public trust for which we are accountable first of all to you our readers. … that quality, above all, is what the Journal prides itself on providing to its readers. It’s a quality that has never been more essential than in these months of cascading news events. … the response to these challenges has left me as proud of this publication, and as optimis-tic about its prospects, as I have ever been in the 20 years I have been responsible for it.

This hypocrisy fails to mention that I had been making the Wall

Street Journal aware for the past 40 years of the corruption that I and other government agents had discovered. The vast amount of docu-mented corruption, the recorded and documented pattern of cover-ups throughout government and the media, and the legal fraternity, consti-tutes an ugly indictment of the United States today. That realization does not fit in with the need of the guilty to cover up for the many peo-ple whose misconduct ensured the success of the 19 hijackers on Sep-tember 11.

9/11 Litigation by Survivors and Family Compensation was available to the injured and representatives of

those who died on 9/11 by an act of congress called the Air Transporta-tion Safety and System Stabilization Act of 2001, referred to as the Vic-tims Compensation Fund. A Special Master, established by the act, would receive and determine claims and amount of compensation. That legislation also provided that lawsuits filed seeking “damages arising out of the hijacking and subsequent crashes must bring their suits in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.” Under the Victims Compensation Fund the claimants would not have to prove fault or show a duty by anyone to pay. The non-economic damages were limited to a certain amount and punitive damages were not available.

The alternative was by the traditional lawsuit manner in which al-legations are made and adjudicated. Lawsuits had been filed against


United and American Airlines, airport security companies, airport op-erators, Boeing Aircraft Company, and the owners and operators of the World Trade Center.

The injured and next-of-kin therefore had two choices for compen-sation: accept a guaranteed payout from the 9/11 fund or file a lawsuit and take chances in court. By accepting compensation from the fund and not following the lawsuit route, chances of discovering the areas of primary blame for 9/11 is lost.

The various complaints filed in the district courts were consoli-dated into five master complaints, divided into one for each of the four crashes and one for the property damage plaintiffs. Among the many defendants were Boeing Aircraft Company for failing to produce air-craft with doors sufficiently heavy to prevent being destroyed by hi-jackers. On this theory, the airlines that purchased the aircraft with the known lightweight doors were also complicit, as they knew, as I knew, they could be eventually forced open by powerful hijackers. Of course, it is probable that the matter of door-strength did not enter into the 9/11 hijackings since the hijackers knew the female flight attendants had keys to the cockpit doors and these were easily taken.

Included in the causes of action against the owners and operators of the World Trade Center were allegations that the building’s design and evacuation provisions were inadequate. The owners of the WTC were the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and the operator, Larry Silverstein’s WTC Properties.

All other known high-rise buildings had supporting column s throughout the interior of the buildings, but the World Trade Center building had no internal support, relying upon each floor being sup-ported only at the perimeters where they were fastened to the outer walls. The fasteners that connected each floor to the outer walls were sufficient to hold that particular floor, if they were not weakened by fire or some other force. In addition, if one particular floor lost its outer support and crashed into the next lower floor, the fastenings on that lower floor would not be strong enough to hold two floors, and then collapse. This sequence of events resulted in the unprecedented collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.

Most of the cases were assigned to U.S. district judge Alvin Heller-stein. He was one of the federal judges to whom I sent letters reporting how Chief Judge Michael Mukasey was blocking the filing of the law-suit that I had submitted to the court in an attempt to report the criminal activities that I discovered that played a role in the events of 9/11.

Motions were filed in the lawsuit (21 MC 100 (AKH)) known as “In Re World Trade Center Disaster Site Litigation,” by the defendants,


to have the “complaints dismissed “because no duty to the plaintiffs existed and because the defendants could not reasonably have antici-pated that terrorists would hijack several jumbo jet airplanes and crash them, killing passengers, crew, thousands on the ground, and them-selves.” Defendants Claimed They Had no Responsibility Many of the defendants named in 9/11 lawsuits filed motions argu-ing they owed a duty to the passengers and crew but did not owe any duty to people on the ground. Judge Hellerstein, in whose court the mo-tions were heard, held:

The injured party must show that a defendant owed not merely a general duty to society but a specific duty to the particular claim-ant, for “without a duty running directly to the injured person there can be n o liability in damages, however careless the conduct or foreseeable the harm.” Lauer v. City of New York, 733 N.E.2d 184, 187 (N.Y. 2000). Courts traditionally “fix the duty point by balanc-ing factors, including the reasonable expectations of parties and so-ciety generally, the proliferation of claims, the likelihood of unlim-ited or insurer-like liability, disproportionate risk and reparation al-location, and public policies affecting the expansion or limitation of new channels of liability.” Palka, 634 N.E. 2d at 193.

I simply hold that the Aviation Defendants, and plaintiffs and society generally, could reasonably have expected that the screen-ing methods at Logan, Newark, and Dulles airports were for the protection of people on the ground as well as for those on board the airplanes that the terrorists hijacked.

In order to be considered foreseeable, the precise manner in which the harm was inflicted need not be perfectly predicted. As DiPonzio v. Riordan explained:” Where an individual breaches a legal duty and thereby causes an occurrence that is within the class of foreseeable hazards that the duty exists to prevent, the individual may be held liable, even though the harm may have been brought about in an unexpected way.”

In Sept. 11 litigation, Judge Hellerstein held (September 9, 2003) that the defendants named in the various lawsuits owed a duty to the victims and that the plaintiffs should have the right to attempt proving that the defendants “failed to exercise reasonable care to provide a safe envi-ronment for the occupants [of the World Trade Center] and invitees with respect to reasonably foreseeable risks.”

Judge Hellerstein wrote: Plaintiffs alleged that the WTC Defendants’ negligence was a


substantial cause of their injuries, because adequate fireproofing and evacuation would have enabled many more escapes. According to plaintiffs, the terrorist acts did not merely operate upon the de-fendants’ negligence; rather, the failure to provide certain safe-guards caused the entrapment of many more people and the loss of many more lives. Large-scale fire was precisely the risk against which the WTC Defendants had a duty to guard and which they should have reasonably foreseen.

I also decline at this stage to find that the acts of the terrorists qualify as an ‘extraordinary’ intervening cause. While the specific acts of terrorists were certainly horrific, I cannot find that the WTC Defendants should be excused of all liability as a matter of policy and law on the record before me. I hold in this opinion that each of these defendants owed duties to the plaintiffs who sued them.

Hellerstein ruled that liability for injuries arising from terrorist at-

tacks could arise from separate causes such as acts of negligence by the owners and operators of buildings. Liability also arose, Hellerstein ruled, “especially given allegations regarding their knowledge of the possibility of terrorist acts, large-scale fires, and even airplane crashes,” all of which were known threats. He held that insurance coverage might arise either from the terrorist acts or from the negligence of the defen-dants.

He ruled that case law has held that an insurance policy may obli-gate an insurer to defend and indemnify against lawsuits from people injured in a terrorist attack even if terrorist attacks were excluded in the coverage. When two causes are responsible for losses the insurer can be liable to defend and indemnify the insured as long as one of the causes might be covered under law. His ruling stated, “the hijacking of commercial jets was the kind of foreseeable risk” that the defendants should have guarded against.

Judge Held that Airlines Not Involved in 9/11 Held Liable Hellerstein held that airlines that provided initial passage of pas-sengers that were later transferred to United and American were also liable. This ruling brought an additional dozen airlines into the litiga-tion as defendants since they had initially boarded the passengers who were later transferred to United and America Airlines. Widow Files Suit Against Bush Under Racketeering Statute

One lawsuit, filed by Ellen Mariani (November 26, 2003) who lost her husband on Flight 175, filed a 62-page RICO action against Presi-dent George Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney, and other White House officials.


Paradoxes in the Filing of Lawsuits I found interesting the filing of many of the 9/11 lawsuits by law-

yers and law firms who I had years earlier made aware of the serious problems in the government’s aviation safety offices, some of whom admitted the gravity of my charges, but covered up for the deadly prob-lems. Now, after 9/11, as in prior aviation disasters that would not have happened if they had exercised even the most elementary responsibili-ties to expose the criminal misconduct that I had brought to their atten-tion, they claimed in their lawsuits that others were negligent in the aviation tragedies on September 11.

Lawsuits were of course filed against many defendants. The law-suits against United Airlines were based upon negligence of the airline. There were several points that were not known that provided even more basis for the lawsuits against that airline.

One, United Airlines personnel knew that hijackers could break down the cockpit door. Richard Pitts, a former United Airlines DC-8 instructor, told me about a chuckle made by one of United Airlines of-ficials during a meeting, admitting that a hijacker could break down the cockpit door and gain entry into the cockpit. This conversation would show what was obvious, that the danger was known and nothing was done about it. I discovered this as standard practice when I had the safety assignment for United Airlines.

United Airlines Had a More Sinister Butterfly-Effect Blame The misconduct of certain personnel at United Airlines had a more

sinister blame for the conditions that enabled terrorists to seize four airliners on 9/11, something that would be understood only by someone with insider knowledge and who recognized what is known as the “But-terfly Effect.”

To understand this relationship it is first necessary to recognize the role played by certain key people in the government’s aviation safety offices that created the conditions that encouraged and enabled terror-ists to seize four airliners on 9/11. Quickly: • Deep-seated misconduct created the conditions that blocked the

federal government from ordering many known preventative meas-ures that could have prevented numerous airline disasters to occur, including the many years of airliner hijackings.

• Pressure from United Airlines personnel, while I and other federal safety agents were assigned federal aviation safety responsibilities for that airline’s known preventative measures The People with Primary Blame Escaped the Consequences

None of the lawsuits listed as defendants the people in the govern-


ment’s aviation safety offices who engaged in corrupt and criminal ac-tivities, and those who covered up for these crimes. None listed federal judges who blocked reporting of the federal crimes that created the con-ditions blocking the preventative measures that would have halted the hijackings.

No Argument Too Ridiculous for Lawyers The law firm of Kreindler and Kreindler filed a multi-billion dollar

lawsuit in the U.S. district court at New York City on September 4, 2002, against Iraq, claiming, “Iraqi officials were aware of plans to at-tack American landmarks.” There was no evidence that this existed. And even if it was true, a foreign country isn’t obligated to report to another country rumors or facts that it learns. Israel officials would be more likely to have known of suspected attacks both from its own intel-ligence sources and from the vast amount of information provided to U.S. intelligence personnel that were ignored.

There was some irony in the lawsuits filed by the Kreindler lawyers and law firm. Starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent, I sev-eral times wrote to Lee Kreindler, the senior partner with Kreindler and Kreindler, advising of the corruption and even criminal misconduct within the government’s aviation safety offices. In one letter Lee Kre-indler wrote and admitted the gravity of my charges and then did noth-ing. Kreindler, in my opinion, by his conduct of silence, was one of many that made possible the events of September 11 for which he was now suing Iraq.

I sent letters to almost all of the lead attorneys handling 9/11 litiga-tion, which contained some information as shown in the following let-ter to Kreindler:

From the desk of Rodney Stich P.O. Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507; phone: 925-944-1930; FAX 925-295-1203

November 23, 2002 Lee Kreindler Kreindler and Kreindler 100 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017-5590 Hello Mr. Kreindler: Your lawsuit on behalf of victims of the September 11, 2001, hijackers caught my attention, causing me to send you a few comments. Some of these comments are obvious, but others aren’t, and these matters constitute, in my opinion as a former government aviation safety agent, the primary blame for the success of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.


Possibly you remember me. I am the FAA inspector on whose program occurred a series of fatal airline crashes due to the chronic deep-seated culture of corruption, incompetence, and other problems within the FAA. I brought a number of matters to your attention, looking for assistance in forcing govern-ment officials to perform their legal duties to receive the evidence and take corrective actions. These are the same problems that continued to result in preventable airline crashes—including hijackings—and which enabled 19 hi-jackers to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001. The following are a few highlights that should play a major role in addressing the primary blame for the success of 19 hijackers and 3,000 deaths: • Very briefly, my background: I am a former federal air safety inspector1

who was given the assignment to correct the conditions causing the worst series of airline crashes in the nation’s history. That is where I first dis-covered the deep-seated corruption, incompetence, and other deep-seated problems in the FAA (and NTSB) related to a series of fatal airline crashes.

• In seeking to circumvent these problems and the endemic cover-ups, I engaged in a number of creative efforts, including: • I acted as an independent prosecutor for about six months. I con-

ducted a hearing during which I obtained the testimony of FAA man-agement personnel and highly revealing government documents in addition to what I had already acquired. The hearing officer, a mem-ber of the FAA administrator’s staff, covered up for the evidence, which continued the deep-seated culture within the FAA. During the hearing, three additional major crashes occurred in my immediate area of responsibilities that were caused by the very same safety prob-lems and safety violations that I had repeatedly reported and were be-ing blocked from being corrected.

• I brought the charges of corruption and related crashes to the attention of the board members of the NTSB. They engaged in cover-ups, which continued the deep-seated problems and the subsequent related crashes. The NTSB then falsified a number of subsequent accident reports to cover up for the misconduct that made the crashes possible and the complicity of NTSB board members.

• I sent letters to members of congress who sympathized, but then falsely claimed these matters were not in their area of responsibilities.

• I filed lawsuits in the U.S. district courts2 at San Francisco against the FAA and NTSB, under the federal crime reporting statute (18 U.S.C. § 4) and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Several of the district and ap-pellate judges admitted the seriousness of the charges but claimed these matters were the responsibilities of Congress. In response to motions by the U.S. attorney, my attempts to report the criminal ac-tivities were blocked.

• Years later, after I sought to report criminal activities in other areas, based upon information acquired from my dozens of government sources,3 orders were rendered barring me for the remainder of my

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 353life from federal courts. These orders blocked the reporting of crimi-nal activities related to corruption in the aviation areas and in other areas of government, some of which were associated with terrorist ac-tivities.

I documented that practice of FAA management warning inspectors not to

make reports of unsafe or illegal practices, destruction of official reports that identify these problems, retaliation against inspectors who continue to make such required reports or who take corrective actions as required to be taken by government directives. Consider the following:

• Hijackers have been seizing airliners for the past 40 years. • FAA inspectors, including me, had reported the simple and inexpen-

sive preventative measures. • FAA management had the responsibility to order these preventative

measures and didn’t do so. • FAA officially reported corruption blocked the federal government

from carrying out its air safety responsibilities, and then other federal officials covered up for the corruption.

Additional people complicit in covering up for the corruption mak-

ing possible the success of 19 hijackers: • Justice Department prosecutors, whose felony cover-ups included the

corruption in the government’s air safety offices (and other areas in which I obtained considerable data and evidence from the many gov-ernment agents who have gravitated to me when they hear me on ra-dio and TV and from my books exposing corruption and those cover-ing up for it).

• Members of Congress, who initially responded to my charges with sympathy and then falsely claimed they had not responsibility. Tell that to the survivors of those jumping to their deaths from the World Trade Center.

• Federal judges, who repeatedly blocked me from providing informa-tion and evidence of criminal activities in the federal aviation safety offices and elsewhere. I sought to report the criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute, which federal judges must receive as part of their administrative duties under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.4

• Federal judges issuing unlawful and unconstitutional orders perma-nently barring me access to the district or appellate courts after I sought to report the criminal activities.

• Ironically, the corruption at United Airlines played a key role in the misconduct within the FAA that resulted in numerous airline crashes, and which, if it has not existed, could have eliminated the misconduct within the FAA that was partly bred by United Airlines pressure.

• Lawyers who knew of these problems and who covered up. • More details at www.defraudingamerica and


www.unfriendlyskies.com.

I often wondered how many crashes, and deaths, could have been prevented if you have exercised moral and legal responsibility to assist in addressing these matters. Some might argue that your cover-up of these matters had more to do with the continuation of conditions within the FAA that were primarily respon-sible for the success of 19 hijackers than many of the defendants you named in lawsuits. Likewise, I wonder how many more air disasters will follow the continuation of the cover-ups. Sincerely, Rodney Stich Further related information at the following Internet sites: www.defraudingamerica.com www.druggingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com

ENDNOTES

1. Also a former Navy Patrol Plane Commander in World War II; international airline captain for many years, activist against corruption in government, start-ing with the government aviation safety offices, the author of numerous books, and guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows since 1978. 2. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible re-peated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long stand-ing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Depart-ment of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other ac-tions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct. 3. Agents of the CIA, ONI, FBI, DEA, Customs, and others. 4. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States,

Post 9/11 Cover-ups 355conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Surprise: no response. Notifying Lawyers who filed 9/11 Lawsuits I sent a copy of my February 6, 2003, letter to the Justices of the

U.S. Supreme Court to several of the law firms that had lawsuits filed related to 9/11. In various letters sent to law firms representing 9/11 victims I sent a copy of that February 6th letter that highlighted the cor-ruption and criminal activities that played key roles in the conditions enabling hijackers to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001.

If the lawyers had used this information they could have provided their clients with not only the means to expose the arrogance and cor-ruption that caused them to lose loved ones but also provide for more adequate compensation. Further, the lawyers—if they had not covered up—would have provided the United States and its citizens with infor-mation needed to halt the defrauding of the nation and the people.

Mary Schiavo, formerly with the Department of Transportation, was one of the lawyers filing 9/11 lawsuits alleging negligence. I had also sent her letters while she held responsibility in the government, describing the corruption and offered evidence. She never responded.

Another Controlled Hearing: The 9/11 Commission Publicized protests from the families of the 9/11 victims forced members of Congress to pass legislation for a bipartisan commission to investigate why hijackers were able to seize four airliners. The legisla-tion was enacted despite President Bush’s opposition. The same pro-tests forced Bush to sign the legislation, which was called The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. The commis-sion was created in late 2002 and was required to complete its work in 18 months, terminating on May 27, 2004. The initial chairman selected by President George Bush (November 27, 2002) was Henry Kissinger. In contradiction to his past and future stonewalling, President Bush stated (November 27, 2004), “His inves-tigation (Kissinger) should carefully examine all the evidence and fol-low all the facts, wherever they lead. We must uncover every detail and learn every lesson of September the 11th.” Bush then continued his stonewalling. Kissinger’s background created such a protest that he resigned. Part of the opposition to Kissinger was due to his involvement in toppling of foreign governments such as the 1973 coup in Chile that toppled Salva-dor Allende in the Socialist government and his role in the invasion of


Vietnam. It was felt that he would shape his opinion so as to be politi-cally astute.

Former New Jersey Republican governor Thomas H. Kean was then chosen as chairman and former member of Congress, Lee H. Ham-ilton, was chosen co-chairman of the Commission. The commission was composed of five Republican and five Democratic appointees. Their first meeting occurred January 27, 2002.

Bush Administration Continued to Block 9/11 Investigation The Bush administration initially opposed any investigation into

determining why 19 hijackers were able to seize four airliners, the worst human disaster in U.S. history. It then repeatedly refused to co-operate with the commission.

Bush’s Secrecy to Prevent Public From Learning of Corruption In Government “Bush Orders a 3-Year Delay In Opening Secret Documents” was

the heading on a New York Times editorial (March 26, 2003) that stated: Add one more item to the list of things the Bush administration

has been quietly doing on the home front while the nation is preoc-cupied with Iraq. This week President Bush signed an executive order that makes it easier for government agencies, including the white House, to keep documents classified and out of public view.

The order does a number of things at once. It delays by three years the release of declassified government documents dating from 1978 or earlier. It treats all material sent to American officials from foreign government—no matter how routine—as subject to classification. It expands the ability of the Central Intelligence Agency to shield documents from declassification. And for the first time, it gives the vice president the power to classify information. Taken individually, each of these actions might raise eyebrows for anyone who values open government. Taken together, they are re-minders that this White House is obsessed with secrecy.

Among the evidence that would be withheld would be evidence of

President George W. Bush’s funding and arming of Iraq’s war machine, the drug smuggling into the United States by people in government po-sitions and secret government operations, including during the first President Bush’s involvement with the Contra operations. “White House Delays 9/11 Commission Investigation” The heading on a Wall Street Journal article (September 8, 2003) stated:

White House Hurdles Delay 9/11 Commission Investigation For the past seven months, the National Commission on Terror-


ist Attacks Upon the United States, otherwise known as the 9/11 Commission, has been looking into the events leading up to the 2001 attacks. But so far the probers have made little progress. The commission is embroiled in tense negotiations over the level of ac-cess it will have to White House documents and the federal person-nel it wants to interview.

That means that the commission may not be able to complete an exhaustive investigation before its deadline next May, according to some of its 10 commissioners and others familiar with its work. From the commission’s inception, commissioners and others say, the White House has put obstacles in its way.

In an earlier New York Times article (July 8, 2003), the matter of

White House intimidation was addressed: The panel said the failure of the Bush administration to allow offi-cials to be interviewed without the presence of government col-leagues could impede its investigation, with the commission’s chairman suggesting today that the situation amount to “intimida-tion” of the witnesses.

President Bush’s Attempts to Block 9/11 Investigation

Referring to the Bush administration’s obstacle to a commission to investigate why the 9/11 hijackings occurred, a Washington Post article by Dana Milbank (September 19, 2002) stated:

Lawmakers from both parties yesterday protested the Bush administration’s lack of cooperation in the congressional inquiry into Sept. 11 intelligence failures and threatened to renew efforts to establish an independent commission.

The White House reacted to the complaints from members of the House and Senate intelligence committees by softening its ob-jection to an independent commission. But the president’s spokes-man said such an independent probe should be “separate and apart from intelligence,” a concession unlikely to satisfy lawmakers be-cause it does not address the heart of their objections.

On the day a joint House and Senate intelligence committee re-leased a staff report on the Sept. 11 failures and began to hold hear-ings, those involved in the congressional investigation said they had been thwarted by the administration’s reluctance to share in-formation about what the White House knew before last year’s ter-rorist attacks.

“Are we getting the cooperation we need? Absolutely not,” Sen. Richard C. Shelby (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Sen-ate Intelligence committee, said in a joint appearance with Chair-


man Bob Graham (D-Fla.) on NBC’s “Today” show. Graham added: “What we’re trying to do is to get people who

had hands on these issues. . . . And what we’re being told is, no, they don’t want to make those kind of witnesses available.”

Both Graham and Shelby yesterday endorsed the idea of independent panels. In his remarks at the start of the hearings, Shelby warned that “there may come a day very soon when it will become apparent that ours must be only a prelude to further inquiries.” Eleanor Hill, the joint committee’s staff director, said in her 30-page statement to the committee that CIA Director George J. Tenet would not declassify “any references to the intelligence community providing information to the president or the White House.” Hill also said Tenet would not declassify the identity of or information about a key al Qaeda leader involved in the attacks.

“According to [Tenet], the president’s knowledge of intelligence information relevant to this inquiry remains classified even when the substance of that intelligence information has been declassified,” Hill testified. She added that “the American public has a compelling interest in this information and that public disclosure would not harm national security.”

In a press briefing yesterday morning, White House press sec-retary Ari Fleischer said that after Congress finishes the current in-vestigation, “we’ll take a look at talking to Congress about whether or not there is anything additional that goes to the broader areas if necessary.” But Fleischer added that such a probe would be “a dis-cussion about broader issues related to 9/11 separate and apart from intelligence.”

The White House had previously opposed any independent ef-fort to examine events that led to Sept. 11, arguing that such a probe could increase leaks and compromise intelligence. The FBI is investigating the intelligence committees after administration com-plaints about leaks to the news media, but the committees say the leaks generally come from the administration.

On Tuesday, Senate Governmental Affairs committee Chair-man Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) said he has growing support for his effort to create an independent commission. Lieberman, who has been working on the proposal with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said he may attach legislation creating a commission to a bill creating the new Department of Homeland Security. “I have had very encouraging conversations with Senators Graham and Shelby . . . who first were a bit skeptical about this idea early on in the year,” Lieberman said. “I think now they’re both ready to sup-


port it.” Shelby acknowledged that the congressional probe would be

incomplete. “I’m afraid if we try to publish at the end of this ses-sion a definitive paper on what we found, that there will be some things that we don’t know because we hadn’t had time to probe them and we have not had enough cooperation,” he said.

Bush Administration Blocking Rally by 9/11 Survivors

Families of 9/11 victims had planned a rally on March 12, 2004, in Westbury, Long Island, having received permission from the Nassau County Police Department. Suddenly, they were barred from reaching the site by the same police department on orders from the U.S. Secret Service. Numerous media services had planned to attend, including international services such as Reuters, Fuji TV, Nippon Television, and local media, including Journal News and Newsday.

Several Notices to 9/11 Commission After the 9/11 commission started its investigation I offered several

times to provide information and evidence showing the areas of pri-mary blame for the success of the hijackers on 9/11, making reference to former position as a government aviation safety agent who was given the responsibilities to correct the conditions responsible for the worst series of airline crashes in the nation’s history. Also, that I acted as an independent prosecutor during this time and had considerable hard evi-dence showing the deep-seated corruption within the government’s aviation safety offices that created the conditions enabling hijackers to seize the airliners on that fateful day. No response.

Being unable to get a response from my letters to the commission or to its Chairman, Kean, I prepared a statement of intended testimony and sent it by certified mail, which should have resulted in being called to testify, and at the very least, to be made a part of the record.

Prepared Statement of Former Federal Aviation Safety Agent

Rodney Stich To The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the

United States

Date: July 19, 2003

I, Rodney F. Stich, declare: I am making the following statements for inclusion into the hearing record of this commission that has the responsibility to determine where the blame existed that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001. Because of my prior experiences, some occur-


ring while I was a federal aviation safety agent in an unusual position, I have considerable insider information that is not otherwise available to this or any other investigative body that reveals where the primary blame existed that resulted in 3,000 people being killed on that day.

My Background, Credibility, and Ability to Discover These Matters • I am a former federal aviation safety agent with an unusual back-

ground and considered a top aviation safety expert with over 60 years of sophisticated aviation experience, starting in 1941. o During World War II, I was a Navy patrol plane commander

flying and teaching in multi-engine aircraft. o After the war, I was an international airline captain for many

years. o I later became an air safety inspector-investigator for the Fed-

eral Aviation Administration (FAA). During my official duties for the federal government I was given the assignment to cor-rect the conditions responsible for the worst series of aviation disasters in the nation’s history. This is where, as a federal in-spector-investigator, I initially discovered and documented the deep-seated culture and corruption within the government avia-tion safety offices that was responsible for decades of prevent-able airline crashes. One of those crashes was the world’s worst at that time, occurring in Brooklyn, New York. The same deep-seated misconduct that made that New York City disaster and many others possible is the same deep-seated misconduct that created the conditions that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001.

o I have written numerous highly detailed and documented books addressing these problems that made the events of 9/11 possi-ble, including multiple E-book and print-book editions of Un-friendly Skies. The primary purpose of these books was to in-form the public of these serious matters in an attempt to cir-cumvent the vast cover-ups of what is probably the world’s worst aviation scandal.

o I have appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows since 1978, seeking to inform the public of matters gravely affecting aviation safety.

o Over the years I have become a confidant to dozens of present and former government agents who have provided me with in-formation and evidence concerning corruption in key govern-ment offices that continue to subvert the national security of the United States.


o Based upon the misconduct that I discovered in my official government air safety position, and the cover-up of such mis-conduct, I exercised certain legal procedures during which I acted the role of an independent prosecutor. During the subse-quent six-month hearing a 4000-page hearing record was de-veloped which provided additional evidence supporting my of-ficial charges that deep-seated corruption in key segments of the FAA was responsible for a series of specific airline disas-ters. Although airline crashes are far less frequent today, these conditions exist, and as shown on September 11, 2001, the con-sequences can be catastrophic.

• Based upon my many years of experience as a government and pri-vate investigator, and expert in many areas affecting aviation, it is my firm conviction that the primary blame for the success of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 was the hardcore misconduct of certain people in government aviation safety offices. Secondary blame was the peo-ple, in and out of government, who engaged in cover-ups, obstruc-tion of justice, and even retaliation to silence my attempts to expose these matters.

• Among the areas of misconduct resulting in many prior aviation disasters that I documented are the following: • Refusal of FAA management personnel in certain segments of

the FAA to take authorized and required actions on major avia-tion safety problems, aviation safety violations, and even criminal violations, some of which occurred in my immediate area of government responsibilities.

• Pattern of deliberate actions by FAA management that blocked federal safety agents from carrying out their aviation safety du-ties.

• Pressure and threats against federal aviation safety agents by FAA management, in retaliation for the agents reporting major safety problems and violations.

• Repeated removal, and destruction, by FAA management of of-ficial records relating to major safety problems and safety vio-lations. This practice continued despite the continuation of fatal crashes arising from the same problems and misconduct.

• Retaliation and threats by FAA management against federal aviation safety agents who initiate authorized and required ac-tions on aviation safety problems that they encounter.

• A corrupt culture that prevented the federal government from performing its federal aviation safety responsibilities.


• Among the many uncorrected aviation safety problems that I and other federal aviation safety agents discovered, reported, and tried to correct, and which were blocked by FAA manage-ment, were the following:

• Airline training and competency check programs at certain air-lines that were a farce, which allowed untrained and unsafe crewmembers to continue in airline operations. These programs did not meet the intent or the specifics of federal aviation safety directives.

• Falsified records to falsely indicate federally required pilot and flight engineer training and competency checks had been per-formed, when in fact they were not performed. These matters were known to FAA management, who retaliated against inspectors who made the reports.

• Falsified records indicating that federally required mainte-nance practices had been accomplished, when in fact they were not accomplished. Several major aviation disasters resulted from this practice.

• Dangerous piloting techniques, such as high sink rate ap-proaches. One example of the deadly consequences: One cap-tain, who I reported having a high sink rate approach, and who was denied corrective training, a few months later crashed at Salt Lake City due to this very same problem. Forty three peo-ple were cremated alive.

• Dangerous flight engineer problems at a major and politically powerful airline. One example of the deadly consequences also existed in that Salt Lake City crash. The flight engineer failed to shut off the fuel shutoff valves and fuel pumps after the ini-tial crash, causing heavy quantities of fuel to be discharged from a broken fuel line, resulting in a major fire. (Compounded by the dangerous piloting practice of that pilot, and at that air-line, plus the refusal of that airline to provide the legally re-quired emergency evacuation training, which was covered up by falsifying government required records.)

• Dangerous practice of pilots descending too low during visual and instrument conditions. Two consequences of this known and unaddressed problem, as examples, were the aircraft that crashed into Lake Michigan and the airliner that crashed during an approach to the Cincinnati Airport.

• Airline refusing to provide government-required pilot training and then falsifying government required records to conceal this practice. The results were poorly trained and qualified pilots at


a major airline and numerous crashes attributed to this miscon-duct.

• Hundreds of airliner hijackings that were easily and inexpen-sively preventable. I and other inspectors reported the urgency of inexpensive and easily accomplished preventative measures that FAA management was authorized and required to be done. FAA management refused to order the measures that would have halted the deadly practice of airline hijackings that have occurred for the past 40 years throughout the world. The con-tinuation of this refusal to act and retaliation against inspectors making reports of the necessity for these corrective actions made possible the success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.

• Many other problems, which I detail in my various government and non-government writings and reports. Deep-seated corrup-tion was primarily responsible for these problems within the government’s aviation safety offices, followed by incompe-tence and politically correct placement of unqualified and in-experienced people in key management positions.

Indifference, Cover-Ups, Complicity, Throughout Government

• Being blocked from carrying out the aviation safety duties, and the close proximity of the crashes and deaths to the misconduct that I discovered, caused me to notify others of these federal crimes. I no-tified the administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration; the political appointees to the National Transportation Safety Board (and its CAB Bureau of Aviation Safety predecessor); various of-fices of the U.S. Department of Justice; members of Congress; and lawyers at prominent aviation litigation law firms. Some admitted the gravity of my charges, and then either refused to act or passive or actively covered up for the deadly practices.

Acting As Independent Prosecutor to Force Corrective Actions As an aviation safety agent and while the crashes due to these prob-

lems were occurring every few months, I exercised remedies in law that permitted me to act as an independent prosecutor for approximately six months. During this time I conducted a hearing during which I subpoe-naed FAA personnel and obtained testimony and evidence that further proved my charges that deep-seated corruption and other misconduct within the FAA was responsible for certain specific aviation disasters—including hijackings. The evidence was covered up by the FAA Admin-istrator’s hearing officer and FAA legal counsel, causing the deep-seated corruption to continue, along with the many airline disasters that followed.


Complicity of National Transportation Safety Board Political Appointees

• I and other federal aviation safety agents repeatedly reported these problems to various members of the National Transportation Safety Board. They had the moral and legal responsibilities to immedi-ately investigate our charges. Instead, they covered up, thereby be-coming complicit in the crashes and deaths resulting from the prob-lems that they cover-up enabled to continue. This complicity re-quired that they omit any reference to the FAA misconduct, omit reference to their own involvement, and cover up for the crash-causing conditions associated with these deaths.

Cover-Ups by Others • I made numerous reports of the misconduct to members of Con-

gress. They also had a moral and legal duty to receive evidence of my charges. Initially, some members of Congress admitted the gravity of what I charged, but then raised various excuses. One such excuse was that these matters were not in their area of respon-sibilities. (Tell that to the families of the 3,000 dead on 9/11!) The matters were in their areas of responsibilities. They also had the op-tion of requesting the General Accounting Office (GAO), the con-gressional investigative body, to receive my evidence. They also had a responsibility under the federal crime reporting statute to re-ceive my evidence. (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.)

• Some of the recipients of my charges were major partners in avia-tion litigation law firms, including some who now represent fami-lies of the 3,000 killed on 9/11. Some wrote, admitting the gravity of my charges, but none would help in getting this information known. Ironically, if they had acted when this information was pre-sented to them, it is very probable that the corruption within the government’s aviation safety offices could have been halted and the conditions enabling hijackers to seize airliners could have been corrected. Similar statements can be made for many others who knew of these charges and who either did nothing, or who actively assisted the cover-ups.

• Refusing to work in such a corrupt environment, I left the FAA. The cover-ups caused the deep-seated corruption within the FAA to continue and, as expected, the crashes and hijackings made possi-ble by this corrupt culture. Reports from FAA inspectors still within the FAA confirmed to me that no meaningful changes had oc-curred. Realizing I had a responsibility, and evidence of the corrup-


tion, I took other steps seeking to expose these matters, including the following:

Using Judicial Process To Circumvent the Cover-Ups • The continuing airline disasters caused me to use my assets1 to

fund various efforts to circumvent the cover-ups and force correc-tion of the worsening corruption that I and other government agents discovered. The cover-ups by members of Congress and Justice Department personnel caused me to exercise remedies provided by criminal and other federal statutes; Titles 18 U.S.C. § 4 and 28 U.S.C. § 1361.

• The federal crime reporting statute requires anyone knowing of a federal crime to report it to a federal judge or other federal officer (such as members of Congress). That statute plainly states this re-sponsibility:

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

I had attempted to use that statute with members of Congress and Jus-tice Department lawyers, but they refused to respond. • Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361 gives any citizen the right to seek a court

order requiring a federal official to perform his legal duty (in this instance, his aviation safety duties) and to halt his or her unlawful conduct.

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

• I filed the first of several federal filings2 the late 1970s and early 1980s, seeking to report the criminal activities related to a series of aviation disasters to a federal judge. Also, to obtain an order requir-ing certain federal officials to perform their aviation safety duties and to halt their unlawful conduct. Initially, federal district and ap-pellate judges admitted the serious of my charges but then, upon motion by Justice Department lawyers, the judges dismissed the fil-ings before I could provide evidence. These dismissals, by ob-structing justice, caused the corruption and related crashes to con-tinue.3


• In the case of a multi-district litigation in Los Angeles involving the crash of a DC-10, the chief plaintiff counsel approved my filing of the amicus brief, which was required by rules of court.

• No one ever denied the validity of my charges. Nor would they be in a position to have enabled them to do so.

Discovering Other Areas of Corruption Harming National Security

• Dozens of other government agents contacted me over a period of many years with information and documentation on areas of cor-ruption4 in government offices that they had discovered. (I detail some of these areas in subsequent books, including the E-book and print-book formats of Defrauding America, Drugging America, and Terrorism Against America. The sole purpose for writing these books has been to circumvent the cover-ups and inform the public of these matters, with the hope that there would be sufficient out-rage to force corrective actions.

• In 1986, based upon the additional information on federal crimes implicating people in key government positions that I discovered, both from my personal investigative work and from my large num-bers of former and present government agents, I again exercised my responsibilities to report the federal crimes under the federal crime reporting statute. Again and again, federal judges and Justice Department lawyers blocked me and my sources from providing evidence of these criminal, and even subversive, activities.

• Federal judges used various tactics to block the reporting of these criminal activities. In addition to blocking the reports being made under the federal criminal statutes (18 U.S.C. § 4), federal judges5 started issuing unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring me access to the federal district and appellate courts. These orders continue in effect to this day, barring me from either report-ing the criminal activities or in defending against the numerous at-tacks that have been made to halt my exposure activities.

Judicial Retaliation for Reporting Criminal & Subversive Activities

• As my discovery of other areas of criminal activities continued, I again exercised my responsibilities under the federal criminal stat-utes to report the criminal activities to a federal judge. Federal judges then expanded on their prior tactics. They charged me with criminal contempt of court for filing papers in the federal courts seeking to report these crimes (and for exercising federal defenses against record-setting violations of federally protected rights that were part of the legal tactics used to halt my exposure activities).


• Ironically, at the age of 70, a multi-millionaire, using my assets to halt these deadly crimes, I was suddenly sentenced to six months in federal prison for my public-spirited activities. While in prison, unlawful and unconstitutional orders were rendered by federal judges seizing and liquidating the $10 million in assets that funded my attempts to expose and correct these criminal activities in which they were implicated. These retaliatory acts were criminal offenses7 by federal judges and Justice Department lawyers. There is some irony in the fact that a former federal agent who sought to report and halt the conditions that enabled the horrible deaths of 3,000 people on 9/11 would suffer such grave retaliation for his attempts to prevent such ongoing tragedies.

Last Judicial Obstruction-of-Justice Prior to September 11, 2001

In my last attempt prior to 9/11 to report these criminal activi-ties, I filed a lawsuit in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada. Several issues were raised in that lawsuit, including (a) the attempt to report the criminal activities; (b) the attempt to have ruled un-constitutional the orders permanently depriving me the right to ac-cess the courts and the termination of my civil and constitutional rights and protections that were taken by the series of injunctive orders; and (c) the attempt to have ruled invalid the judicial seizure and liquidation of the $10 million in assets that funded my expo-sure of the criminal activities.

As in the past, the federal judge8 acting on that legal filing blocked the reporting of the criminal activities and blocked my other causes of actions. In addition to refusing to receive the reports of the criminal activities, the federal judge ordered that I pay a large fine for daring to file the action and for daring to report the conditions that enabled 9/11 to occur.

I then filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit court of appeals—where the obstruction of justice had commenced in the late 1970s and continues to this day. The appellate judges9 ruled that the prior injunctions permanently barred me from the due process and equal protection right to file papers in the district and appellate courts, in-cluding the right to file appeals. That ruling was made after the 3,000 deaths occurred on 9/11.

Complicity of Many Members of Congress • For several years prior to September 11, 2002, I repeatedly notified

(in writing, some by certified mail) many members of congress of the serious corruption that I and other government agents had dis-covered, some of which related to major national security matters. These serious matters that we sought to report included, for in-


stance, reports of (a) surface to air missiles being acquired by ter-rorists, made possible by actions of FBI and CIA personnel; (b) suitcase nuclear devices being smuggled from the former Soviet Union through Lithuania; (c) retaliation against FBI agents seeking to report criminal activities of CIA personnel; (d) drug smuggling by people acting under cover of government positions and covert operations; (e) Soviet spies in the FBI and CIA offices; and (f) many other matters inflicting great harm upon national interests.

Post 9/11 Judicial Obstructions of Justice Judicial Cover-Ups in Southern District of New York

In accordance with required filing procedures and payment of fees, I submitted to the U.S. district court for the Southern District of New York (August 8, 2002) a filing under the federal crime re-porting statute, seeking to report the criminal activities that I charged caused the conditions to exist that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11. By law, those papers must be filed. Fur-ther, the federal crime reporting statute and the gravity of the charges by government insiders, plus the events of 9/11, demanded that the federal judges promptly receive the evidence. In addition, federal law requires that the charges stated in federal filings be ac-cepted as true10 at that stage of the pleadings. But if that were done, the pattern of judicial obstruction of justice would be exposed.

In violation of federal law relating to due process and equal protection right to file papers in federal court, it is now eleven months later and the papers have not been filed. Nor have the pa-pers and the filing fees been returned. This refusal to file (a) vio-lates federal rules for filing such papers; (b) blocks the reporting of criminal activities to a federal judge as specifically provided by the federal crime reporting statute; (c) prevents corrective actions to be taken—the same misconduct that made the events of 9/11 possible; (d) prevents the relatives of the 3,000 victims to have the guilty punished for their wrongful conduct and prevents them from dis-covering the primary defendants responsible for their grief; (e) con-tinues in effect the years of corruption, the cover-ups, and the con-sequences that will surely result in further tragedies just as the prior cover-ups made the 3,000 deaths on 9/11 possible.

Judicial Cover-Ups in District of Columbia Another attempt to report these matters was made where one of

the 9/11 tragedies occurred, to the U.S. district court, District of Columbia. This filing occurred on June 12, 2002.11 U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr., promptly dismissed the filing with-out prior notice, in clear violation of federal due process and the


mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute. Kennedy sought to support the dismissal—and the cover-up—on the basis that former CIA legal counsel and federal judge Stanley Sporkin issued an order in 1991 permanently barring me from fil-ing any papers in the federal courts. That 1991 order was made in a filing where I sought to report the criminal activities that I and my group of other former government agents had discovered. Not only did Sporkin block the reporting of criminal activities (some of which involved the CIA in which he had been legal counsel), but also misused the judicial position and the courts to permanently terminate the legal rights, protections and defenses that are “guar-anteed” by the laws and Constitution of the United States. His ac-tions in preventing exposure of misconduct in government obvi-ously enabled the deaths of 3,000 people to occur on 9/11, just as of the prior judges played key roles.

I then filed a notice of appeal and paid the filing fees with the District of Columbia court of appeals. The court of appeal judges12 dismissed the appeal on January 16, 2003, holding that I have been barred for life from filing papers in district and appellate courts as guaranteed to other people, including murderers.

I then filed a motion for an en banc hearing. Without any hear-ing, this motion was denied by order dated March 26, 2003,13 up-holding Sporkin’s order permanently depriving me the due process right to federal courts—and upholding the judicial practice of ob-struction of justice and violating the federal crime reporting statute.

Complicity in These Events by Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

• From the late 1970s to the present date, the Justices of the U.S. Su-preme Court have aided and abetted these criminal acts of judges over whom they have supervisory responsibilities. They had been repeatedly advised by me, through legal filings and certified letters, of the crimes and the consequences. They also had a duty under the federal crime reporting statute to receive the evidence of federal crimes, as provided by the federal crime reporting statute. Justices have supervisory responsibilities over the conduct of lower federal judges. The only partially favorable response was a letter from Jus-tice Bryon White, and that was a form of apology for not being able to help.

Included in Issues Needing To Be Addressed Relating to 9/11

• Included in the issues that must be addressed to determine the peo-ple sharing in the blame for the conditions enabling 19 hijackers to kill 3,000 people on September 11, 2001, are the following:


o Understand where the primary blame lies for the success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001. The blame for the conditions that enabled 19 hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11 rests primarily with people in the government’s aviation safety of-fices who had the authority, responsibility, and knowledge of this ongoing aircraft hijacking problem. Ignoring hundreds of prior hijackings is far more than a problem of stupidity on the part of government aviation safety personnel.

o The present tactic of placing the blame on a more innocent intelligence failure is either a deliberate diversionary tactic plus ignorance in some quarters. Relying solely on being told that a criminal event was to take place obviously cannot supersede the need to take known and required preventative measures for continuing hijackings that had been occurring for the prior 40 years.

o Determine from government insiders who had reported the problems and have evidence of these reports the arrogance and corruption within the government’s aviation safety offices re-sponsible for thousands of deaths over the years. I have the documents to prove this deep-seated problem, including the 4000-page hearing transcript from the FAA hearing at which I acted as an independent prosecutor.

o Examine the relationship of the corruption to specific airline crashes—including years of airline hijackings, and many that occurred in my immediate area of government aviation safety responsibilities.

o Receive my testimony and documents that prove a pattern of obstruction of justice and felony retaliation against a former federal agent and witness, perpetrated by federal judges and Justice Department lawyers, that played key roles in the 3,000 deaths on September 11, and key roles in other tragedies, some ongoing.

o Obtain testimony from some of my sources (former and present government agents), concerning the corruption in government offices in the aviation and in other areas. This evidence will show the cancerous spread of corruption in government, made possible by the cowardly or profitable cover-ups.

For years I have been warning in writings that covering up for the corruption by people in key government positions would surely worsen the conditions and the deadly consequences. The scenario occurred time and time again, and no better example could exist than what oc-curred on September 11. There is no way that this level of corruption


can be corrected without the public being told of these matters. Tragi-cally, the cover-ups made possible the expansion of the corruption in government, involving so many different people, that it is now almost impossible to eradicate. The public will continue to pay the conse-quences, as in the past.

Summary • Hundreds of airliner hijackings have occurred during the 40 years

prior to the successful hijackings of four airlines by 19 hijackers on September 11.

• FAA safety inspectors, including myself, had reported the urgent need for the FAA to order the simple and inexpensive preventative measures that would have prevented most of the hijackings and re-lated deaths (and other preventable aviation disasters arising from known unsafe or illegal practices).

• FAA management personnel had the authority and responsibility to order these preventative measures.

• FAA management engaged in a pattern of arrogance and corrup-tion, knowingly causing the deaths of many people over the years.

• Evidence of these criminal activities is found in official govern-ment documents, some of which are in my possession; in the 4000-page hearing transcript where I acted as an independent prosecutor while an FAA inspector; in other records that I possess; in my tes-timony, and testimony of other former federal agents. My evidence, and that of the dozens of former government agents and other in-siders to whom I have become a confidant, would reveal other ar-eas of corruption in government offices that continues to inflict great harm upon important national interests, including national se-curity, and the harm inflicted upon innocent people.

• Federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors engaged in a documented series of criminal activities to block my reporting of these matters, with awesome consequences for the United States and its people.

• If the matters detailed in this statement are not fully exposed the same deadly consequences affecting aviation will continue as they have from when I first made similar warnings into official govern-ment records.

Executed this 19th day of July 2003.

Rodney F. Stich Fax: 925-295-1203 POB 5, Alamo, CA 94507


Sent by certified mail: 7002 0860 0003 9592 6412 Further related information at the following Internet sites:

www.defraudingamerica.com www.druggingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com

ENDNOTES

1. After leaving the FAA I concentrated on real estate investments,

and I used the equity in these investments to fund the expensive efforts to expose these serious matters.

2 Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspec-tors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. de-nied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible repeated crashes from the same seques-tered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Cor-poration and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.)(addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Department of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other actions filed by Stich seeking to expose and correct the pow-erful and covert air disaster misconduct.

3 The frequency of airline crashes today are far less frequent than when I was given the assignment to correct the problems. However, this reduction in the number of crashes is more due to on-ground and in-aircraft safeguards. The basic problems in the most critical area of the government’s aviation safety offices still exists, being why the ob-vious, simple, and inexpensive preventative measures were not taken as required by law.

4 Among the dozens of courageous present and former government agents who contacted me during the past 18 years have been agents of the FBI, CIA, DEA, Customs, INS and other federal and state agencies. The information and documentation that they have provided me shows that the secondary blame for the success of the 19 hijackers was far


more than an intelligence failure in certain government agencies. Rather, a level of corruption that remains unaddressed and which will remain until there is a full-blown investigation (which will never oc-cur). However, the information I acquired shows a degree of criminal-ity and subversive misconduct implicating people in key government positions.

5 Among many federal judges participating in the series of orders obstructing the reporting of these crimes were Marilyn Patel, Milton Schwartz, Levi, Stanley Sporkin,

6 Inflicting harm against former federal agents and witnesses are felonies under Title 18 U.S.C. §1510. (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery, misrepresentation, intimidation, or force or threats thereof to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator; or Whoever injures any person in his person or property on account of giving by such person or by any other person of any such information to any criminal investigator–Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

18 U.S.C. § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an infor-mant. (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threat-ens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to– (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforce-ment officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (c) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hin-ders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from–(2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense .... 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an in-formant. (b) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for –

(2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... 7 Reno, Nevada filing, Nr. CV-N-00-0152-ECR-PHA. March 24,


2000. 8 U.S. District Judge Howard C. Reed, Jr. 9 Ninth Circuit appellate judges James R. Browning, Andrew

Kleinfeld, Ronald Gould. Order dated April 12, 2002. 10 Federal courts must accept as true the allegations in the com-

plaint and supporting affidavits as true. (See, e.g., Gardener v. Toilet Goods Assn., 387 U.S. 167, 172 (1967). If plaintiff’s allegations state a claim for which federal courts can grant relief, the court must accept jurisdiction. The United States Supreme Court stated in Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (1980). Also, FRCivP 8(d) states: “Effect of Fail-ure to Deny. Averments in a pleading to which a responsive pleading is required, are admitted when not denied in the responsive pleading.”

11U.S. district court, District of Columbia, Nr. 02cv01172, filed June 12, 2002.

12 District of Columbia appellate judges Douglas Ginsburg, David Sentelle, and A. Raymond Randolph.

13 Denial for en banc hearing was made by judges Douglas Gins-burg, Harry Edwards, David Sentelle, Karen Henderson, Harry Randolph, Judith Rogers, David Tatel, and Merrick Garland.

There was no response, despite the fact that if any of my allega-

tions were true, including those about prior aviation disasters arising from the corruption within the government’s aviation safety offices, the commission members would be complicit in subsequent disasters made possible by their cover-ups.

Cover-ups in 9/11 Commission Report The 9/11-commission report was issued in July 2004, and followed

the usual pattern of diverting attention from hardcore misconduct involving government officials. The report identified many intelligence failures, failures to act on known intelligence, an overall systemic fail-ure and culture, and even failure of members of Congress to act. But, it did not address the corrupt and criminal activities that I had docu-mented as a key government insider, the criminal cover-ups, the crimi-nal retaliation against former government agents who sought to report the criminal activities that made it possible for the hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11. By covering up for these deep-seated problems, the problems will continue, just like before, along with the fatal conse-quences.

Brief Reference to Congress’s Oversight Failures The 9/11-commission report pleased many members of Congress


since it dealt with intangibles. The summary of its contents was to blame institutional errors rather than individual misconduct. However, by way of “failures” rather than wrongful acts, the commission report blamed members of Congress for failure to provide greater oversight of the intelligence agencies.

My experiences were that many members of Congress were crimi-nally implicated through cover-ups as numerous government agents, including myself, had either testified to or sent letters to members of Congress describing corrupt and criminal activities in government of-fices. I even filed a lawsuit against members of Congress charging them with criminal obstruction of justice. Their response did not deny that they were made aware of these serious charges; their response was that they were immune from the consequences of their actions.

Response to 9/11 Commission Cover-Up of Primary Blame The 9/11-commission report was extensively focused on intelli-

gence failures, failures to act on known intelligence, and a general sys-temic breakdown. The commission members covered up for the hard-core criminal misconduct that was the primary area of blame for the conditions that allowed hijackers to seize four airliners. By covering up, the many years of tragedies related to the misconduct, and the cover-ups, would continue. No amount of renaming of government agencies, or forming new agencies, would correct these conditions.

I sent a final letter and declaration to the 9/11 Commission on April 12, 2004, adding to what was stated in the earlier declaration. Part of that declaration follows:

The National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

Date: April 12, 2004

I, Rodney F. Stich, declare: This April 12, 2004, declaration is sent to Thomas H. Kean,

Chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, by certified mail.1 The purpose of this declaration is to place another declaration into the commission records from a former government agent concerning the documented misconduct in govern-ment offices that played key roles enabling terrorists to seize four air-liners on September 11, 2001.

The members of this commission are circumventing the primary areas of blame for the events of 9/11. This standard tactic of controlled investigations has repeatedly prevented exposure and correction of se-rious corruption in government offices, enabling the continuation of catastrophic effect upon the United States. The members of this com-mission are intent at showing “mistakes” were made that led to 3,000


people being killed rather than reveal the criminal actions that made 9/11 possible.

The basis for the statements in this declaration is based upon my many years of experience as a government agent and subsequent inves-tigations, which included the input from large numbers of other present and former government agents.2

During my activities as a federal aviation safety agent I had been given the assignment to correct the conditions causing the worst series of airline crashes in the nation’s history. In this assignment I acted as an independent counsel, conducting hearings and receiving evidence, which proved the existence of deep-seated corruption within the gov-ernment’s aviation safety offices related to a series of fatal airline crashes.

The standard cover-up of corrupt and criminal misconduct follow-ing that proceeding caused and enabled numerous catastrophic blow-back consequences. These included years of preventable aviation trage-dies—of which the hijackings of four airliners on September 11, 2001, were only the most recent and prominent consequences.

This declaration highlights the primary causes for the success of the hijackers on 9/11, including the: • Culture and deep-seated misconduct within the government’s avia-

tion safety offices that blocked the federal government from per-forming its aviation safety responsibilities.

• Cover-ups and obstruction of justice relating to these federal of-fenses.

• Intelligence failures exacerbated by the deep-seated corruption that subverted the function of government agencies, and especially in the U.S. Department of Justice and the Central Intelligence Agency.

Failure of key people in government to act on intelligence.

Four Areas of Primary and Secondary Blame For Events of September 11, 2001 The primary blame for the success of the hijackers on 9/11 was the

misconduct of people in certain government aviation safety offices that created the conditions enabling hijackers to seize four airliners and hi-jackings of the prior 50 years, all of which were easily preventable. The deep-seated corruption within the FAA were addressed in a 4000-page FAA hearing record during which I acted as an independent counsel.

The tragedy-related corruption was charged in various judicial fil-ings during which I sought to report the federal crimes to a federal judges under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting


statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. I sought to report these matters to members of Congress, all of whom refused to receive evidence and for various reasons engaged in cover-up.

Secondary primary blame for the events of 9/11 were the cover-ups and obstruction of justice that blocked present and former government agents—including me—from reporting these federal offenses The most heavily documented evidence of the felony cover-ups and obstruction of justice were the actions by federal judges and Justice Department lawyers to lawsuits that I filled under the federal crime reporting statute seeking to report these matters. Their obstruction of justice were federal crimes per se.

Subordinate and contributing blame for the events of 9/11 were so-called “intelligence failures” by people in Justice Department offices and the CIA. These “failures” were undoubtedly influenced by the widespread corruption in these two government offices.

Contributing subordinate blame arises from the failures of politi-cians and members of Congress to act when insiders provide informa-tion of corruption in government offices.

Another contributing subordinate blame arises from the “controlled investigations” that covered up and obstructed justice in prior areas of misconduct involving politicians and government officials.

Much of this information is detailed in my various informational books and in charges made in my various filings in the federal courts

Further Details Supporting These Charges

Corrupt Culture in Certain Government Aviation Safety Offices

The misconduct in certain government aviation safety offices that repeatedly blocked the federal government from meeting its aviation safety responsibilities is reflected in the following conditions that I and other government agents discovered, that are stated here as examples: • Refusal of FAA management personnel in certain segments of the

FAA to take, and to block, authorized and required actions on known and reported major aviation safety problems, safety viola-tions. Some of these actions were criminal violations that resulted in great aviation tragedies.

• Included in the types of obstructionist actions by FAA manage-ment, that blocked federal safety agents from carrying out their aviation safety duties, were the following: o Pressure, threats, and retaliation against federal aviation safety

agents for attempting to report and correct major safety prob-lems.


o Removal and destruction of official records reporting safety problems, safety violations, and criminal violations.

o Placement of unqualified people in key positions for political gains, including the office of FAA administrator, and who are not capable of recognizing threats needing corrective actions, and are not capable of controlling rogue elements within the agency. A typical example of this was the failure of the politi-cally-correct FAA administrator and other FAA personnel to order the simple and inexpensive preventative measures to block hijackers from taking control of an airliner. There were numerous reports, shortly prior to 9/11, by the White House, the FAA, the Department of Transportation, the Justice De-partment, and the CIA, of planned hijackings, for which every one of the people in control of these offices could have ordered the simple preventative measures that would have prevented terrorists from taking control of the four airliners.

• Examples of how the government’s aviation safety responsibilities were sabotaged by people in the government’s aviation safety of-fices, that I and other federal aviation safety agents discovered, re-ported, and tried to correct, included the following: o Airline training and competency check programs at certain air-

lines that were a farce, which allowed untrained and unsafe crewmembers to continue in airline operations. These programs did not meet the intent or the specifics of federal aviation safety directives. This documented misconduct was especially promi-nent at United Airlines, which had some intriguing blowback and “butterfly effects” related to September 11, 2001.

o Falsified records at certain politically powerful airlines, to falsely indicate federally required pilot and flight engineer training and competency checks had been performed, when in fact they were not performed.

o Falsified records indicating that federally required mainte-nance practices had been accomplished, when in fact they were not accomplished.

o Dangerous piloting techniques, such as high sink rate ap-proaches, that went uncorrected. One example of the deadly consequences was a pilot that I reported having a high sink rate approach. Despite my report of his dangerous piloting tech-nique and the federal directives requiring that he receive cor-rective training, FAA management refused to require it. Sev-eral months later, due to this dangerous condition, the plane crashed at Salt Lake City, causing forty-three people were cre-


mated alive. I was removed from my duties for six weeks when I reported this common problem of other senior pilots at United Airlines.

o Dangerous flight engineer problems at a politically powerful airline that was involved in several accidents and near acci-dents.

o Dangerous practice of pilots descending too low during visual and instrument conditions, which I reported. Two conse-quences of this known and unaddressed problem were airliners that crashed into Lake Michigan and during an approach to the Cincinnati Airport.

o Airline refusing to provide government-required pilot training and then falsifying government required records to conceal this practice. The results were poorly trained and qualified pilots at a major airline and numerous crashes attributed to this miscon-duct.

o Refusal to require backup flight instruments at a major air-liner, that resulted in numerous near-crashes and in one crash that caused over 100 deaths before changes were finally or-dered.

o Airline hijackings that were easily and inexpensively prevent-able. I and other inspectors reported the urgency of inexpensive and easily accomplished preventative measures that FAA man-agement was authorized and required to order be taken. FAA management refused to order the measures that would have halted the deadly practice of airline hijackings that have oc-curred for the past 40 years throughout the world. The con-tinuation of this refusal to act and retaliation against inspectors making reports of the necessity for these corrective actions made possible the success of 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001.

o Many other problems, which I repeatedly reported, and detail in my various government and non-government writings and reports, and in informational books that I have written.

Complicity of Political National Transportation Safety Board Members

I and other federal aviation safety agents reported the serious inter-nal FAA problems, including criminal acts related to several prior air-line crashes, to various members of the National Transportation Safety Board (and its CAB Bureau of Aviation Safety predecessor). Instead of responding as required by law, they covered up for the federal offenses, which enabled the preventable crashes to continue. In response to the resulting crashes, they falsified their official accident reports by omit-


ting material facts that absolved them of blame and covering up for the misconduct in the FAA. The deadly problems continue to this day—and were primarily responsible for the conditions enabling terrorists to hi-jack four airliners on 9/11.

Complicity of FBI and Other Justice Department Personnel Starting while I was a federal aviation safety agent, and while act-

ing as an independent counsel, I made my charges of deadly federal criminal misconduct related to several prior airline crashes known to FBI agents and several U.S. attorneys, along with the head of the De-partment of Justice. I encountered the standard refusal to receive evi-dence that implicated federal personnel.

I encountered Justice Department block when I circumvented the block and appeared before a federal grand jury in Denver while I was a federal agent. I encountered their blocks when I filed federal actions under the federal crime reporting statute seeking to report the Trojan-horse-like corruption in government offices. In 1986, Justice Depart-ment prosecutors charged me, a former federal agent and witness, with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report criminal activities, including those that created the conditions enabling terrorists to seize four airliners on 9/11.

I had notified FBI chief Robert Muller of the criminal activities while he was in the U.S. attorney’s office in San Francisco and then after he became head of the FBI, followed by the usual coverup. The same notification was sent to U.S. Attorney John Ashcroft and prior U.S. attorneys. They refused to receive the evidence that I and other former government agents sought to report related to other areas of cor-ruption implicating government officials and other government person-nel.

Justice Department personnel prosecuted the head of a multi-agency task force that focused on the drug operations of people in the New York-New Jersey areas, including the Jersey City terrorists who the following year bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. The prose-cution of that agent halted the investigations and sent a message to other government agents not to proceed with the investigations. That obstruction of justice tactic enabled the Jersey City terrorists to proceed with the bombing of the World Trade Center a year later, in 1993.

This typical retaliation against government agents is endless, and includes the false imprisonment of another FBI agent, one of my many sources. He was falsely charged to silence his exposure of CIA in-volvement with organized crime drug smuggling, illegal funding of Iraq during the 1980s, and other offenses.


The same culture was shown by the FBI’s support for organized crime in the Boston area, with William Bulger and others, wherein FBI agents—with Washington approval—provided the names of govern-ment informants to organized crime figures, causing the informants to be murdered. I have acquired information from organized crime insid-ers that the same conditions existed in the New York City area, show-ing the widespread culture in the FBI, which obviously is not compati-ble with protecting U.S. interests. Considerable other evidence is avail-able to show the depravity of this culture. I offered this information to members of Congress and the Justice Department; none responded.

Complicity of Many Members of Congress For several years prior to September 11, 2001, I repeatedly notified members of Congress (some by certified mail) of the serious corruption that I and other government agents had discovered in the government’s aviation safety offices and within the Justice Department and the Cen-tral Intelligence Agency. I repeatedly requested that they receive testi-mony and evidence from me and other former and present government agents. Our offers were repeatedly ignored. It is this group in Congress that shares peripheral blame for the events of 9/11. The serious matters that I sought to report included, for instance, reports of (a) surface to air missiles being acquired by terrorists, made possible by actions of FBI and CIA personnel; (b) suitcase nuclear de-vices being smuggled from the former Soviet Union through Lithuania, and which will surely be used in American cities at some future date; (c) drug smuggling into the United States by people acting under cover of government positions and covert operations; (d) Soviet spies in the FBI and CIA offices, made known prior to their discovery; (e) retalia-tion against FBI agents seeking to report criminal activities of CIA per-sonnel; and (f) other matters inflicting harm upon national interests. No one ever denied the validity of my charges. Nor would they be in a position to have done so. Initially, when the corruption was related primarily to the FAA, some members of Congress admitted the gravity of what I charged. Some refused to act on the excuse that these matters were not in their area of responsibilities. (Tell that to the families of the 3,000 dead on 9/11!) The matters were in their areas of responsibilities. They also had the option of requesting the General Accounting Office (GAO), the congressional investigative body, to receive my evidence. They also had a responsibility under the federal crime reporting statute to receive my evidence of federal crimes. The “Butterfly Effect” Ironically, if any of the recipients of these charges had acted when this information was presented to them, it is very probable that the cor-ruption within the government’s aviation safety offices (and elsewhere)


could have been halted and the conditions enabling hijackers to seize airliners for the past 50 years corrected. It is the “butterfly effect” of these covered up areas of misconduct that continue to undermine the United States in many areas, including protection against terrorist at-tacks.

Initial Actions to Report Corruption in FAA: Acting As Independent Prosecutor

My initial attempts to report and force correction of the misconduct resulting in a series of preventable airline crashes occurred while I was an aviation safety agent. I exercised remedies in law that permitted me to act as an independent counsel. For six months I conducted hearings, obtained testimony and documents, and in a 4000-page hearing record proved the existence of deep-seated corruption within the FAA (and at United Airlines) related to a continuing series of fatal airline crashes. Possibly because of the gravity of the scandal and the many related deaths, the FAA Administrator’s office and FAA lawyers covered up the evidence. The continued coverup of these corrupt activities caused me to resign from the FAA in a letter refusing to work under such corrupt condi-tions. The deep-seated culture and resulting airline tragedies increased in severity thereafter. I then supported myself by investing in real es-tate, an endeavor that eventually increased my assets to $10 million, and would fund subsequent activities to expose the corruption in gov-ernment offices. Using Federal Criminal Statutes and the Judicial Process The continuing preventable airline disasters caused me to use two federal statutes to circumvent the coverups: Titles 18 U.S.C. § 4 and 28 U.S.C. § 1361:

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possi-ble make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361 gives any citizen the right to seek a court order requiring a federal official to perform his legal duty (in this instance, his aviation safety duties) and to halt his or her unlawful conduct. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency


thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff. The first of several federal filings occurred in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Federal district and appellate judges admitted the seriousness of my charges, but upon motion by Justice Department lawyers, the judges dismissed the filings before I could provide evidence. These dismissals, by obstructing justice, caused the corruption and related crashes to continue. In the case of a multi-district litigation in Los An-geles involving the crash of a DC-10 associated with FAA misconduct, the chief plaintiff counsel approved my filing of the amicus brief.

Circumventing the Coverups Through Publicity Seeking to circumvent the vast coverups, I sought to provide in-formation to the public and generate outrage and responsible reaction. I published the first of several editions of Unfriendly Skies in 1978, and started appearing as guest and expert on the first of over 3,000 radio and television shows. As a result of these activities, many other gov-ernment agents contacted me over a period of years, providing me in-formation and documentation on areas of corruption in government offices that they had discovered. I detail some of these areas of corrup-tion in subsequent print and e-books.

Continuation of Earlier Judicial Obstruction of Justice In 1986, based upon the additional information of corruption in

government offices that I and other former and present government agents had discovered, I again exercised my responsibilities to report the federal crimes under the federal crime reporting statute. Federal judges repeatedly refused to receive the information that they were re-quired to receive as part of their administrative duties under the clear wording of Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Justice Department lawyers blocked every effort to make these reports. Federal judges combined their obstruction of justice with terminat-ing my civil rights. They started issuing unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring me access to the federal district and appel-late courts. These orders continue in force at this time and are being repeatedly enforced by federal judges, especially in the Ninth Circuit and Washington, D.C. district and appellate courts.

Felony Retaliation for Reporting Criminal and Subversive Activities

As information and evidence of additional criminal activities con-tinued to be discovered, I again exercised my responsibilities under the federal criminal statutes to report the criminal activities to a federal judge. Federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors then ex-panded their deadly obstruction of justice tactics by charging me with criminal contempt of court for filing papers in the federal courts. They


charged that the prior judicial orders permanently barred me from filing any papers in the federal courts and my attempt to report the federal crimes were therefore criminal contempt of court. From 1986 to 1995, I was constantly under either literal house arrest or imprisoned for at-tempting to report criminal activities under 18 U.S.C. § 4. Ironically, at the age of 67, a multi-millionaire, using my assets to halt these deadly activities, federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors prosecuted me, and sentenced me to federal prison for six months, which included two months in solitary confinement. While in prison, federal judges issued unlawful and unconstitutional orders seiz-ing and liquidating the $10 million in assets that funded my exposure activities. These retaliatory acts were criminal offenses. When I filed objections to the seizure and liquidation, federal judge Edward Jellen charged me with criminal contempt of court, and again sentenced me to federal prison. There is some irony in the fact that a former federal agent, who sought to report and halt the conditions that enabled the deaths of 3,000 people on 9/11, would suffer such massive personal and financial re-taliation.

Latest Obstruction-of-Justice— Prior to September 11, 2001—By Federal Judges My last attempt, prior to 9/11, to report the corrupt activities was a

lawsuit filed in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada. Several issues were raised in that lawsuit, all of which were associated with the judi-cial actions to block my reports. They included (a) the attempt to report the criminal activities under 18 U.S.C. § 4; (b) the attempt to have ruled unconstitutional the orders permanently depriving me the right to ac-cess the courts and the termination of my civil and constitutional rights; and (c) the attempt to have ruled invalid the judicial seizure and liqui-dation of the $10 million in assets that funded my exposure of the criminal activities, and peripheral defenses.

Continuing the judicial obstruction of justice, the federal judge act-ing on that legal filing, blocked the reporting of the criminal activities, and blocked my other causes of actions related to the obstruction of justice.

I then filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit court of appeals—where the obstruction of justice had commenced in the late 1970s and continues to this day. Ninth Circuit appellate judges ruled that the prior injunctions permanently barred me from filing papers in the district and appellate courts, including the mandatory requirements to report federal crimes to a federal judge, the right to defend myself, including the right


to file appeals. That ruling was made after the 3,000 deaths occurred on 9-11.

Continuing Post 9/11 Judicial Obstruction of Justice I submitted to the U.S. district court for the Southern District of

New York, on August 8, 2002, a filingunder the federal crime reporting statute, seeking to report the criminal activities that I charged consti-tuted the primary blame for the conditions to exist that enabled hijack-ers to seize four airliners on 9/11. By law, those papers must be filed upon receipt if they are in proper order and the filing fee paid, which did exist.

The federal crime reporting statute and the gravity of the charges by a former government agent and witness demanded that federal judges promptly receive the information. Federal law even requires that the charges stated in federal filings be accepted as true at that stage of the pleadings.

In violation of federal criminal and civil due process law, the pa-pers were blocked from being filed. Not until I wrote letters to the Jus-tices of the U.S. Supreme Court complaining about the matter that the complaint was finally filed: 13 months after being received.

Long-Delayed Filing Followed by Immediate Dismissal, Violating Federal Laws Compounding these irregularities, Chief Judge Mukasey simulta-

neously filed a five-page sua sponte dismissal order—that required weeks to prepare—with the delayed filing of the papers seeking to re-port the corruption related to the events of 9/11. His dismissal order addressed (and misstated) charges stated in the Complaint that had not yet been made a part of the judicial record because of the 13-month delay in filing!

The refusal to file the papers (a) violated federal rules for filing such papers; (b) blocked the reporting of criminal activities to a federal judge that had already played a key role in the terrorist hijackings of 9/11; (c) delayed and prevented corrective actions to be taken, enabling a continuation of the prior catastrophic consequences; (d) obstructed justice; (e) prevented the relatives of the 3,000 victims of 9/11 to have the guilty punished for their wrongful conduct and prevented them from discovering the primary blame responsible for their grief; (f) con-tinued in effect the years of corruption, the cover-ups, the obstruction of justice, and the consequences that will surely result in further trage-dies as the history of such activities plainly reveals.

Irregularities by Justice Department Personnel in the Court of Appeals Following Judge Mukasey’s highly irregular dismissal order, I filed

a timely notice of appeal, and in accordance with the briefing schedule,


filed the appellant brief by the January 12, 2004, briefing date. The brief to be prepared by the U.S. attorney, and due to be filed by Febru-ary 12, 2004, was never filed. I then filed a declaration of filing irregu-larities and a motion to order that the U.S. attorney file the brief and for sanctions.

The failure of the U.S. attorney to file the brief was “understand-able.” After charging Martha Stewart with obstruction of justice and conspiracy, he had to continue the pattern of obstruction of justice and conspiracy that are documented in judicial records—and that made the events of 9/11 possible, or address the corruption and the coverups that would open a literal can of worms, the gravity of which is unparalleled in the nation’s history.

Judicial Coverups in District of Columbia: It Never Ends An earlier post-9/11 attempt to report the corruption related to the

events of 9/11 was made in the U.S. district court, District of Columbia, where another 9/11 tragedy occurred. U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr., dismissed the June 12, 2002, filing almost as soon as it was filed, continuing to violate federal criminal and due process law.

Judge Kennedy sought to support the dismissal—and the coverup—on the argument that former CIA legal counsel and federal judge Stanley Sporkin issued an order in 1991 permanently barring me from filing any papers in the federal courts. That 1991 order was made in a filing where I sought to report the criminal activities that I and my group of other former government agents had discovered—including those that made 9/11 possible.

I filed a notice of appeal and paid the filing fees with the District of Columbia court of appeals. Court of appeal judges dismissed the appeal on January 16, 2003, holding that I had been permanently barred from filing papers in district and appellate courts, rights which are guaran-teed to other people, including murderers. In effect, they approved the obstruction of justice and termination of all due process defenses guar-anteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States.

I then filed a motion for an en banc hearing, which was denied by order dated March 26, 2003. The judges of this powerful Washington Court of Appeals upheld Sporkin’s order permanently depriving me the due process right to federal courts, the right of federal judges to ob-struct justice, and to be protected against the consequences of their criminal acts.

Complicity by Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court From the late 1970s to the present date, the Justices of the U.S. Su-

preme Court had been repeatedly advised through legal filings and cer-tified letters of the crimes, the national security consequences, and the


felony misconduct of judges over whom they had supervisory respon-sibilities. They also had a duty under the federal crime reporting statute to receive the evidence of federal crimes that I reported to them.

The only partially favorable response was an October 28, 1991, let-ter from Justice Bryon White, which was a form of apology for not be-ing able to help. He wrote, “As a single Justice I can be of no help to you. I am returning the petition.”

My Background, Experience, and Credibility For Making These Statements I held a key air safety position in the Federal Aviation Administra-

tion (FAA). I had been given the assignment to correct the conditions responsible for the worst series of airline crashes in the nation’s history. During this assignment I discovered and documented corrupt and criminal activities that caused and enabled a number of airline disasters to occur. These discoveries—and the standard coverups in govern-ment—caused me to exercise the law in a manner that enabled me to act as an independent counsel, the purpose of which was to create a government record showing the relationship between the misconduct and a series of fatal airline crashes.

I had been a Navy Patrol Plane Commander in World War II; I had been an international airline captain for many years, including consid-erable experience in the Middle East. I was a focal point for other gov-ernment agents and insiders to provide me with insider information and documentation on matters that continue to inflict great harm upon the United States, its people, and national security. My credentials are very unusual. I had been a guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and televi-sion shows since 1978. I have nothing to gain, and everything to lose—much of which has already occurred—for trying to do my duty as a citizen and former federal agent.

Moral and Legal Responsibility of Every Member of 9/11 Commission Rather than continue the standard practice of coverups through

“controlled investigations,” this commission must address the deep-seated uncorrected problems that created the conditions enabling terror-ists to seize four airliners on September 11, 2001. This includes: • Understand that the successful hijackings of four airliners by terror-

ists on September 11, 2001, were primarily aviation disasters for which the primary blame was with people in the government’s aviation safety offices; that the preventative measures were known for many years; that people in the government’s aviation safety of-fices had the authority and responsibility to order the simple and inexpensive preventative measures; that they refused to perform


this mandatory duty and obstructed others who sought to carry out the government’s aviation safety responsibilities.

• Obtain testimony and evidence from myself and some of the many other former government agents that have provided information and evidence to me of criminal and even subversive activities.

• Understand that so-called “intelligence failures” include corruption in certain government offices.

• Understand that the refusal to act on known threats is the same deep-seated culture that I discovered while I was in the Navy a year prior to Pearl Harbor, and is caused by many factors, including coverups and refusal to face facts.

• Address the documented hardcore corruption by a large number of federal judges and those who aided and abetted them, in blocking the reports of criminal activities that relate not only to the events of 9-11 but to other activities inflicting great harm upon national secu-rity. Prima facie evidence of these judicial crimes is in judicial re-cords. If the matters detailed in this statement are not fully exposed the same deadly consequences affecting major national interests, including national security, will continue as they have for so many years. Deadly Consequences if Obstruction of Justice Continues It is my belief that this commission is engaging in a coverup, seek-

ing to place the blame for the events of 9/11 on the more innocent “in-telligence failures” and failure to act, rather than the hardcore criminal and subversive activities of key government personnel. By this conduct the members of this commission have an equal, and in some cases a more prominent role, in the continuation of corrupt and criminal activi-ties, and that they will share blame for continuation of the catastrophic consequences.

Were it not for the complicity of much of the media and the self-serving coverup of much of Congress, the members of this commission would be at risk of exposure. Executed this 12th day of April 2004.

Rodney F. Stich Fax: 925-295-1203 POB 5, Alamo, CA 94507


More Information on 9/11 Commission Cover-Ups The composition of the 9/11 Commission included people who had

much to hide about their own complicity in the 9/11 events. One of the members was former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In the book, De-frauding America, I describe how Congressman Hamilton covered up for the rampant drug trafficking by CIA-related personnel during the Iran-Contra affair while he was chairman of the congressional commit-tee responsible for investigating the Iran-Contra operation. Despite the overwhelming amount of insider information about the drug smuggling that was part of that operation, Hamilton falsely stated there was no truth to the charges. Those cover-up tactics met the legal definition of obstruction of justice.

Hamilton also played a key role in the October Surprise hearings, covering up for the scheme that delayed the release of the 52 American hostages held by Iran following the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran. I detail this operation extensively in the book, Defrauding America, relying heavily upon CIA operatives who were part of the covert operation.

Commission’s Executive Director Philip Zelikow Also covering up for the people whose actions enabled the 9/11 hi-

jackings to occur was Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission. Zelikow was close to the very people whose possible failures, or misconduct, were responsible for the conditions enabling the four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11.

Zelikow was a member of President George W. Bush’s Foreign In-telligence Advisory Board in 2001, prior to the September 11, 2001, terrorist hijackings. He had a vested interest in protecting his own fail-ure to act on the terrorist warnings. Zelikow, who had been on Presi-dent Bill Clinton’s administration, and advised the Bush administration on terrorist-related matters, downplaying the terrorist threats.

Like Having the Mafia Serve as Judge and Jury Those in control of the 9/11 Commission made a decision that only

one of the ten members of the 9/11 Commission, and Zelikow, would be allowed to view the most sensitive and pertinent classified docu-ments. A New York Times article addressed this secrecy:

Advocates for the families said they were alarmed by the Commission’s disclosure on Thursday that only one of the 10 commissioners would have access to a wide range of the briefings, and that the only person from the commission with similar access would be its staff director, Philip Zelikow, who has close ties to Condoleezza Rice and other senior officials in the Bush administra-tion.

The Commission has previously rejected a request from vic-


tims’ families to limit Mr. Zelikow responsibilities sharply in light of potential conflict of interests involving the White House.

The families’ advocates said the decision to have Mr. Zelikow be one of only two commission officials with wide access to the highly classified documents: the other is Jamie S. Gorelick, a De-mocratic commission member who was Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton Administration, raised new questions about the investigation’s impartiality.

Mr. Zelikow, who wrote a book with Ms. Rice in 1995, was on the Bush Administration’s transition team for the National Security Council and has acknowledged having contacts earlier this year with Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief political advisor, about Mr. Zelikow’s scholarly work at the University of Virginia. FBI-DOJ Involvement in the Scheme Another member of the 9/11 Commission, with a background of

cover-ups (i.e. obstruction of justice) was Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, the second highest position in the Department of Jus-tice, from 1994 until shortly before 9/11. Prior to that she was a U.S. Attorney. She played a key role in discrediting the planned terrorist at-tack information provided to Gregory Scarpa Jr., a mole inside the al Qaeda cell involving al Qaeda terrorist Ramzi Yousef. I describe this in great detail in Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, and the Mafia.

Her conduct prevented defenses to be initiated against the planned terrorist attacks that Yousef described to Scarpa, with deadly catastro-phic consequences in the terrorist bombings in Africa, in the downing of TWA Flight 800, and in the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11. An-other example of the ripple effects from seemingly remote corrupt acts. The reason for refusing to acknowledge or act on the information ob-tained by Scarpa was to discredit his expected testimony concerning murders perpetrated by a key FBI supervisory agent in the New York offices.

Gorelick probably played a role in the actions by the U.S. attorneys to block several of the federal lawsuits that I filed seeking to report the criminal activities that I had discovered. These included the series of airline crashes arising from the corruption that I discovered and docu-mented while I was a federal agent.

Another member of the 9/11 Commission was CIA Director George Tenet, a career politician who repeatedly covered up for CIA corrup-tion. After 9/11, he covered up for the lying by President Bush and his team that were used to deceive and obtain public support for the war that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.


Caproni: One of the DOJ Behind-the-Scene Officials One of the DOJ officials that had a role in DOJ handling of the

Scarpa was former U.S. Attorney Valerie Caproni. She played a key role in the scheme to ignore the information about the planned terrorist attacks reported by that mole in the al Qaeda organization.

After TWA Flight 800 was downed in 1998, Caproni issued orders barring the National Transportation Safety Board from investigating the crash. She assigned the investigation to the FBI. It was another example of how it was profitable to join the winning team that; like a Trojan horse subverting the national interest.

Typical Promotion for Playing the Game In August of 2003, U.S. Attorney Valerie Caproni was appointed to

the position in the FBI’s Washington offices responsible for providing legal advice to FBI officials. This included how to deal with FBI or other Justice Department problems and scandals.

FBI Supervisor Responsible for Many New York Murders Years earlier, as a federal prosecutor in New York, Caproni charged

FBI Supervisory Agent Lindley DeVecchio with lying about feeding confidential information to Colombo Mafia capo Gregory Scarpa Sr. Now, with the simmering scandals below the surface, she protected FBI-DOJ officials from being exposed in not only the DeVecchio Mat-ter but also FBI-DOJ officials’ cover-up of the insider information on the planned terrorist attacks.

Private Investigators Provided Evidence That the 9/11 Commission Ignored In an April 5, 2004, letter to Chairman Lee Hamilton, chairman of

the 9/11 Commission, by Stephen P. Dresch of Forensic Intelligence International. Dresch, Dresch sought to circumvent the DOJ cover-ups related to the advanced warning of terrorist acts that FBI personnel ig-nored that Gregory Scarpa Jr. provided to them:

Re: Pre-September 2001 FBI and Dept. of Justice Intelligence on Terrorism (R. Yousef)

Dear Chairman Kean and Vice Chairman Hamilton:

Our monitoring of the Commission’s hearings indicates that sig-nificant intelligence concerning the terrorist threat to the United States obtained between 1996 and early 2001 by various components of the U.S. Department of Justice has not been provided to the Commission.

This intelligence was provided to agents of the New York office of the FBI and senior prosecutors with the offices of the U.S. Attorneys for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York by an informant,


Gregory Scarpa, Jr., who developed a close personal relationship with Ramzi Ahmed Yousef while Yousef and Scarpa were incarcerated at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York in 1996 and 1997, with supplemental information provided in 2000 by Scarpa to an official of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons after he was transferred to the Administrative Maximum Security (ADMAX) Penitentiary in Florence Colorado, to which Yousef had already been transferred and where both currently remain. In early 2001 another inmate of Florence AD-MAX attempted to transmit much of the information developed by Scarpa to the director of the FBI, the President of the United States and the Attorney General.1

We first became aware of this intelligence when, for purposes en-tirely unrelated to terrorism, we met with Scarpa at Florence ADMAX in March 2003. In the course of these meetings Scarpa provided to us his contemporaneous (1996-97) handwritten notes of his conversations with Yousef and his terrorist codefendants2

and copies of FBI Forms 302 (informant reports) recounting the information which he had pro-vided to agents of the FBI.

3

1 We cannot, of course, confirm that these mailings, made by

Gerard Van Hoorelbeke, in fact left the prison or reached their intended recipients. Van Hoorelbeke remains incarcerated at Florence ADMAX (Reg. No. 10376-029).

2 Scarpa reported conversations with Yousef and with Yousef’s codefendants, Wali Khan Amin Shah, Abdul Hakim Murad and Eyad Ismoil. Many of these conversations referenced a person identified by the terrorists as “Bojinga,” whom we believe to be Osama Bin Laden.

3 During his incarceration at the MCC, Scarpa was regularly de-briefed by an agent of the FBI who, using the alias “Susan Schwartz,” posed as a paralegal employed by Scarpa’s attorney, Larry J. Silverman. In addition to these reports, Scarpa, utilizing a mini-camera provided by the warden of the MCC, provided the FBI with photo-graphs of documents (“kites”) which Yousef shared with him. Also, with the assistance of Scarpa (acting on behalf of the FBI) Yousef was able to make telephone calls, monitored by the FBI, to active (unincar-cerated) members of his terrorist networks via a “patch-through” phone accessed from MCC.

The intelligence provided by Scarpa included specific threats to U.S. airlines, the identification of countries (e.g., England) through which terrorists were entering the United States and testing

U.S. security procedures, instructions for smuggling explosive


chemicals and detonators (including hiding these in the heels of shoes), and formulas for explosives and for the production of phosgene and mustard gases. Yousef revealed to Scarpa his strong interest in obtain-ing blank

U.S. passports which “his people would only use for one trip to board the planes to be hijacked.” Further intelligence laid out a plan to videotape the killings of hijacking victims, with distribution of these tapes to the media.4

One very serious missed opportunity to disrupt a terrorist network here in the United States prior to September 11, 2001, involved Yousef’s agreement to meeting in New York between Scarpa’s associ-ates (who would have been disguised FBI agents) and four active (un-incarcerated) terrorists. This meeting never took place because the cog-nizant FBI agents and assistant U.S. attorneys refused to agree to Yousef’s demand that $3,000 be provided to the terrorists.

It should be noted that Scarpa provided this assistance to the FBI at considerable risk not only to himself but also to members of his family, whose address he was compelled to provide to Yousef to enhance his credibility.

We have identified the following officials as having been directly involved with Scarpa in his role as an informant, as summarized in the attached “Scarpa-Yousef Intelligence Timeline”:

5

New York Office of the FBI • Susan Schwartz (alias) • Pat White • James Kallstrom

U.S. Attorneys’ Offices • AUSA Michael Garcia (EDNY) • AUSA Patrick Fitzgerald (EDNY) • AUSA Valerie Caproni (EDNY) • U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White (SDNY) Metropolitan Correctional Center (New York) • Warden R.M. Reish Administrative Maximum Secuity Penitentiary, Florence,

Colorado • Mr. Manly (SIS)

4 Scarpa’s intelligence anticipates “shoe bomber” Richard Reed,

the authorization for the 9/11 attacks given by Yousef’s uncle, Kahlid Shaikh Mohammed, Mohammed Atta’s and Al Qaeda’s English con-nections, the single-use passports employed to board the airplanes hi-


jacked on 9/11, and the videotaped death in Pakistan of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.

5 The office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York was initially informed of Scarpa’s contacts with Yousef at the MCC and his willingness to serve as an informant by his attorney, Larry J. Silverman (46 Trinity Place, New York 10006; 212-425-1616), who remained informed of Scarpa’s activities on behalf of the govern-ment.

Although the information provided by Scarpa appears to have been fully documented, especially in Forms 302 prepared by the New York office of the FBI, we do not know if this information was disseminated to other agencies with responsibility for the prevention of terrorist at-tacks on the United States.

We understand that AUSA Patrick Fitzgerald (EDNY), in a later (sealed) court filing, attested to the credibility, accuracy and value of the terrorism intelligence provided by Scarpa. However, at the time of Scarpa’s sentencing AUSA Valerie Caproni denigrated Scarpa’s credi-bility as an informant. Apparently, Scarpa’s credibility was perceived to pose a threat in the context of serious questions which had been raised concerning the informant relationship of Scarpa’s father, Greg-ory Scarpa, Sr., with FBI Supervisory Special Agent R. Lindley De-Vecchio, the revelation of which might place in jeopardy a number of convictions secured by the office of the U.S. Attorney (EDNY). This latter matter, entirely unrelated to terrorism, remains a subject of con-tinuing, independent investigation.

We strongly advise that the Commission fully examine the terror-ism intelligence secured by the government through the informant ser-vices of Gregory Scarpa, Jr., and assess the extent to which it was ap-propriately utilized to reduce the terrorist threat to the United States.

Respectfully submitted, Angela Clemente Stephen P. Dresch, Ph.D. [email protected] 706-294-9993 Principal witness: Gregory Scarpa, Jr. Reg. No. 10099-050 ADX

P.O. Box 8500 5880 State Highway 67 South Florence, Colorado 81226 719-784-9464 Attachment: Scarpa-Yousef Intelligence Time-

line


Attachment Prepared by Angela Clemente

In this document, “Scarpa” is Gergory Scarpa, Jr. (USBoP Reg. No. 10099-050) and “Yousef” is Ramzi Ahmed Yousef (USBoP Reg. No. 03911-000). Documentation confirming the entries is noted following the date. Documentation includes: • FBI Forms 302 (informant reports) • Scarpa’s contemporaneous handwritten notes (originals provided to

us in March 2003)

Photos taken with the mini-camera provided by Warden Reish (MCC) Entries for which no source is cited derive from personal inter-views conducted with Scarpa at Florence ADMAX in March 2003 and from subsequent telephone interviews. Because neither we nor Scarpa have had access to the full FBI file, FBI Forms 302, photographs and other documentation may exist which provide corroboration for un-documented entries and for other significant intelligence provided by Scarpa. • Approx. February 20, 1996 (Handwritten) (Initiation of Scarpa’s

contact with Ramzi Yousef at MCC) Yousef began speaking to Scarpa about hurting the judge on his case or other federal judges, prosecutors, or a U.S. ambassador. Yousef stated that he had four of his people in the United States and they are working on and waiting for others. Yousef stated that if he and Scarpa worked to-gether he would show Scarpa secret formulas, chemical mixes and gases that would be able to poison the water in large areas of New York, federal buildings, and courts. Yousef also stated that he would teach him the methods of how to blow up an airplane.

• February 27, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef told Scarpa he would teach him how to make bombs, smuggle them through x-ray ma-chines, assemble the bombs, and how and where to place it in the airplane. Yousef told Scarpa if his people could get military deto-nators then he would go through teaching him the steps of making massive bombs.

• February 29, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef told Scarpa about three steps for U.S. Airliners 1 How to make hydrogen peroxide [sic] 2 How to make timer devices 3 How to smuggle the device and assemble it in the airplane

• Yousef requested $3,000 for the third step. Yousef spoke of let-


ting Scarpa make contact with the individual terrorists who were here in the United States and on their way to the United States.

• March 26, 1996 (Handwritten) Scarpa gave his daughter Maria’s address to Ismoil. Ismoil told Scarpa that Yousef was going to hurt someone on his case to cause a mistrial and that he had this per-son’s address. Scarpa tried to discourage him and said that front addresses are used and Scarpa offered Ismoil that he would get the correct address for Yousef.

• March 27, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef later said that Scarpa taught him something new he didn’t know that they used “front” addresses and thanked him, then sent Scarpa a kite with AUSA Garcia’s name on it.

• March 28, 1996 (Handwritten) (Before mini-camera had been pro-vided to Scarpa) Yousef asked Scarpa to have his people (meaning Scarpa’s alleged militia group) kill FBI witness Dave Williams and in return he wouldn’t have to send him the monies or become a Muslim. Yousef also spoke about teaching Scarpa smuggling tech-niques and how to blow up airplanes.

• [Scarpa reports that the FBI first took him seriously when he reported threats on AUSA Garcia and FBI SA Williams. It was at this point that the mini-camera was provided.]

• March 29, 1996 (Handwritten; mini-camera provided and photo taken of this information) Scarpa asked for the name again or whatever information he (Yousef) had on the guy and Yousef gave him a paper with the main FBI witness from Washington. Photo taken of this information.

• Approximately April 4 or 12, 1996 (Handwritten; photo taken with minicamera) Scarpa asked Yousef if he gave him the correct name because his people said there was no such name. Yousef sent a paper back with AUSA Garcia’s full name. In addition, Yousef stated that he was sending someone to check on security measures in Atlanta.

• April 17, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef stated to Scarpa that the per-son who will be sent by Bojinga to see the security measures will be coming from England, otherwise they would attract attention. Immigration is tougher on people coming from Arabic countries than those coming from Europe. Yousef wanted Scarpa’s people to either kill FBI Williams or do an attack on a government installa-tion and Yousef wanted to be informed ahead of time because he hasn’t seen anything happen yet by Scarpa’s people.

• April 22, 1996 (Handwritten) $500.00 was placed into Yousef’s account. It took approximately 2 1/2 months to release it out of


MCC. Approximately two weeks later after the money was released TWA Flight 800 went down in New York.

• April 24, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef questioned Scarpa about a 3-way call. At some point a 3-way call was made out of MCC.

• May 1, 1996 302 (Handwritten) Yousef asking about 3-way calling again he said he communicates to Bojinga sometimes through call-ing his sister and talking in a coded way. Yousef said his sister tells her husband who then passes messages on to Bojinga. Yousef said that he used to receive letters from Bojinga through his paralegal but didn’t feel comfortable.

• May 7, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef came back from court. He said that AUSA Garcia was smirking. Yousef said, “this guy’s lost his life for sure.”

• May 8, 1996 (Handwritten; photo shot with mini-camera) Yousef told Scarpa about Marad seeing FBI and Prosecutors about cooperating indicating “a game” saying, “these people are crazy.” FBI Susan Schwartz wanted to know who showed Scarpa on paper how to make timing devices and bombs. Scarpa thought about it and thought that it might have been Ma-rad.

• May 13, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef spoke of a person (no name given) that gave up Shah and others. Yousef stated that he sent a coded message to Bojinga and informed him about the guy and that he lives in Qatar. Yousef thought he’d be killed soon. He was not recruited initially by FBI but instead another intelligence agency. He was recruited from a club in his country where he use to hang out. Yousef suggested to Bojinga to attack the U.S. Embassy in Qu-tar.

• May 17, 1996 (Handwritten) A 3-way call took place at 9:45 pm and one on May 16

th at 9:10 p.m. (Picture shot with mini-camera)

Yousef was upset. He had a visit with his attorney and said that the government knew about his tampering with the evidence (taking two ID cards, etc). The judge wouldn’t let the informa-tion in.

• May 19, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef told Scarpa that he advised his people to start the bombing of airplanes. He told his people that it was to be done by sending a parcel bomb by DHL or any other U.S. Cargo company from Dubai in United Arab Emirates. In addition, if any U.S. airplane should blow up then its origin departure point would be from Dubai. Yousef said it may happen and it may not depending on security measures taken in the cargo offices.

• May 19, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef gave a very detailed paper on


how to smuggle explosives into an airplane. He referenced RDX explosives and 747 airliners. He gave detailed information on the weights of explosives and flying heights of airplanes and the types of explosives to be used as well as where they should be placed in the airplane. He detailed smuggling procedures for explosives in the heels of shoes, medicine capsules, baby powder containers, and how TNT- Tetryl can be melted and shaped into a soap or candle. He gave this information two months before TWA Flight 800 went down in New York killing 230 passengers. TWA Flight 800 was a 747 and RDX explosives were found on the remnants of the crash. This flight was not considered a terrorist act. Month of June papers are all missing from Scarpa’s file and no ma-

terials are in my possession for June’s FBI 302’s. On June 22, 1996 I have one document • (Handwritten) stating that Yousef told Scarpa that his people

were checking the security measures in Atlanta and then they were on their way back to New York. He further stated that noth-ing could be done over there (meaning Atlanta). He also said that he would stop the plane explosion for now because his trial was going well and didn’t want anything to “dirty up” his trial.

• July 2, 1996 (FBI 302, date investigated June 29, 1996) Yousef spoke of Bojinga doing the bombing in Saudi Arabia. Yousef stated that he was originally sent on that mission to check the security measures and that tanker truck was discussed. [Downing of TWA Flight 800]

• July 17, 1996 (FBI 302) TWA Flight 800 crashed killing 230 pas-sengers off Long Island, New York. Yousef asked to use the tele-phone the night of July 17, 1996 he also had a visit with his attor-ney until 10:00 pm and still requested use of the telephone which was denied.

• July 18, 1996 (FBI 302) Jerry Koupakis a former U.S. Customs Agent that was corrupt told Scarpa that he told his father not to travel TWA or American Airlines on the morning of July 18, 1996. Yousef told him this information prior to July 18, 1996.

• July 23/24, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Ismoil told Scarpa, “I told you this is going to happen.” He was also referencing a con-versation Scarpa and he had months prior where Ismoil said that “nothing would be left of New York just give it some time.”

• July 28, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef was questioned by Scarpa about the Atlantic Park bombing. Yousef said that his friends left Atlanta to come to New York.


• August 5, 1996 (FBI 302, investigation occurred July 28, 1996) Yousef refused to speak about the TWA Flight 800 because he was afraid that the government would link him to it.

• August 7, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten w/o date) Yousef spoke of knowing the address of a U.S. Ambassador from the Philippines. His name was something like Neoponti. In addition, Yousef told Scarpa that he placed his blood on two Casio watches, which were in evidence. He placed blood over the bands of the two watches to show he was tortured and wanted to request to bring in a blood ex-pert. He said no one saw blood on the watches and he’s told no one about it.

• August 26, 1996 (FBI 302) Scarpa suggested to the FBI that Bin Laden is Bojinga because of the money and his location.

• August 28, 1996 (FBI 302) Ismoil stated to Scarpa that Yousef has the brains but Shah has friends all over the country and they will be freed one way or another.

• September 4, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef wanted $4,000 sent by Scarpa to an address overseas. He said he would then have that money forwarded to his (Yousef’s) people here in the United States.

• September 7, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef was upset about tight security on AUSA Garcia and stated that two weeks prior to the trial ending Garcia was seen going to court without anyone near him.

• September 8, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef spoke of hijacking more than one plane and it would be forced to land in either Afghanistan, Sudan, or Yemen. Yousef spoke of Scarpa getting passports for Bo-jinga. He said Bojinga would get an address for Yousef to send the passports to in Iran or Libya.

• September 13, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef spoke of how he sent messages out through writing other inmates names and numbers on the envelopes then mailed them out, that way prison staff wouldn’t know it was coming from him.

• September 14, 1996 (FBI 302 on 9-19-96 & Handwritten) Yousef spoke to Scarpa about wanting to take a hijacked plane to Sudan, and building a temporary runway for the plane to land. Most of Bojinga’s followers are in Sudan.

• September 17, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef spoke about sending to bags with cargo in two separate flights to blow up two U.S. airplanes.

• September 19, 1996 (FBI 302, investigation on 9-15-96) Yousef


said that Sudan has a lot of Bojinga followers. Afghanistan is un-der authority of Afghan leaders, which are held by Mujahaddin. Shah use to work in shipping weapons for Bojinga from Af-ghanistan and other countries. Bojinga uses Afghanistan as a ref-uge from other countries looking for him. Muslim fighters have certain areas in those countries under their control in deserts and mountains with all kinds of weapons where no one will be able to reach them without being killed. Women and children would be sold to Muslim fighters in Algeria, Libya, and Sudan. Yousef also spoke again of a U.S. Ambassador by the name of Neoponti from the Philippines who is a target of a kidnapping.

• December 8, 1996 (FBI 302 transcribed on 12-16-96) Yousef stated that Bojinga wanted 5 U.S. Passports with no picture or writing on them and 1 with any picture on it. Yousef advised that Bojinga’s people would use all the passports for the hijacking and 1 as a sample to make others. Yousef further stated that the passports are for 1 trip to board the planes to be hijacked.

• December 18, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef has been visited recently by a new Imam and Yousef and Imam have been speaking for an extended period of time in English and in Arabic.

1

Yousef spoke to Scarpa about an address he would give Scarpa in Iran where the blank passports would be sent and spoke of a way he communicates (sends and receives messages) to outside of the prison. Yousef also stated that the government would never go af-ter Bin Laden because the government knows that within one week 12 U.S. planes would be blown up.

• December 27, 1996 (Handwritten) Yousef spoke to Scarpa about getting the passports in a hurry. He wanted them within two days.

• December 28, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef began brag-ging to Scarpa about a new formula for gas (Phosgene Cocl and Mustard) that he invented that could be used to harm thousands of people and all countries could use it and could be sold for lots of money and it’s inexpensive and easy to use. Yousef advised that a gas mask with oxygen must be worn when making this formula. Yousef sent Scarpa a kite showing him how to make that gas with the equation and diagram. (Scarpa turned this information over to FBI Susan Schwartz)

• December 29, 1996 (FBI 302 & Handwritten) Yousef stated that he decoded a message from Bojinga and told Scarpa that after his re-lease (Yousef’s release) he (Yousef) would contact Scarpa to meet with him either in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Then later he wanted to meet with Scarpa’s people to train them in Guerilla warfare.


Yousef wanted to make deals with Scarpa’s people in selling coun-terfeit money, drugs, etc. If Yousef isn’t released during the hijack-ing (because the government doesn’t give into their demands then they will kill the passengers 1 by 1 and video tape it then release it to the media.) They would release one tape each week. Yousef also spoke of doing something to the Pakistani government or pertain-ing to the Pakistani government before the hijacking occurs. Yousef spoke of Afghanistan being isolated from the world and the U.S. government. Yousef also spoke of selling the pretty women passengers for as much as $10,000 per person. Yousef spoke of training all Muslim militants groups around the world about how to hijack planes.

• December 29, 1996 (FBI 302) Yousef said they had a “alternative plan” however if it doesn’t work they will proceed with the hijack-ing and demand the release of WTC and the “Sheiks” case defen-dants. Scarpa felt that Yousef might be getting his messages also through the newspaper.

• Imam-The caliph who is successor to Muhammad as the leader of the Islamic community. On January 2001 the FAA issued a warn-ing that terrorist might try to hijack or destroy American aircraft. On January 24, 2001, Italian authorities record an Islamic Imam discussing fake ID’s for “The brothers going to America.” (See book 1000 Years for Revenge by Peter Lance)

• January 10, 1997 (FBI 302 & Handwritten date also 1-15-97) Yousef showed Scarpa components of the way he sends and re-ceives messages outside of the prison. It was a component equipped with a microphone, transmitter (walkman), electronic board, gas lighter. He showed Scarpa his voice on the radio. Yousef told Scarpa he sends and receives messages similar to Morse code. Yousef stated that he received his last message and said “every-thing is a go.”

That information was kept out of the final report released to the public, thereby protecting the FBI-DOJ officials involved in actions that blocked actions being taken to prevent the terrorist acts.


CHAPTER TEN

Conspiracy Theorists Interfering with the Truth

ompounding the problem of getting the truth about 9/11 known to the people were the conspiracy theorists with their wild statements that were contradicted by the facts, by reports of pro-

fessionals, and by common sense. These theorists with their wild charges were usually people with no competency or experience in the aviation area.

I sometimes wondered if they were paid by covert personnel in government to divert attention away from former government agents seeking to report criminal activities in government offices and covert government operations.

In the Soviet downing of the Korean Airlines 747 in 1983 off Sak-halin Island with an air-to-air missile, the theorists were claiming that the aircraft had not been shot down, that the plane landed safely, and the people were still alive. The fact that international aviation groups recovered wreckage, and that the Soviets admitted shooting down the aircraft, didn’t matter to them.

In the crash carrying Ron Brown, the conspiracy people were claiming that Ron Brown had been shot before the plane crashed; that the surviving flight attendant was murdered; and that the radio beacon on which the aircraft was homing had been physically moved, causing the plane to crash. And with the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11, the conspiracy people really outdid themselves with ridiculous charges. These includes charges that: • United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767, hit the south tower of the

World Trade Center with a missile or bomb hanging from under-neath the aircraft.

C


• One of the planes that crashed into one of the World Trade Center buildings was not an airliner, but a military tanker filled with fuel.

• The clouds of debris shooting out of the WTC were due to explo-sives planted in the World Trade Center and not possible from a mere collapse of the floors.

• Expulsion of debris from the collapsing World Trade Center build-ings indicated an explosion at these floor levels.

• The absence of melted steel showed that the fire did not cause the WTC buildings to collapse, further evidence of explosives.

• The collapse of WTC building 7 was a controlled demolition. • Seismic tracings indicate bomb explosions that brought down the

World Trade Center buildings. • The lobbies of both towers were damaged before the towers col-

lapsed. And there was no way the impact of the jet caused such damage 80 stories below.

• The main World Trade Center buildings were caused to collapse by explosives placed throughout the building at the ground level.

• The damage to the Pentagon was not caused by a plane, but rather, a missile.

• The width of the damage in the Pentagon was less than the wings of a Boeing 767.

• There were no Muslims on board the aircraft, and some of the peo-ple identified as terrorists are still living.

• A missile from an Air Force jet shot down United Airlines Flight 93 over Pennsylvania.

• No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the air force bases, be-ing ordered to stand down on 9/11.

• It had been standard procedures for decades to intercept aircraft that are off-course and do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers.

• The pulverizing of the concrete structure resulted not from the fal-ling building but from explosives.

Addressing Conspiracy Theorists Ridiculous Claims

There were no windows on the side of the plane that was suppos-edly United Flight 175, indicating it was a military tanker air-craft: This statement could have been made by dozens of people who

simply did not see the aircraft well enough. One theorist site claimed that a Fox employee, Marc Birnbach, stated he did not see any win-

Conspiracy Theorists Interfering With the Truth 405

dows on the plane that crashed into the South Tower. That caused con-spiracy theorists to conclude that it was a military tanker aircraft. But Birnbach later stated that he was in Brooklyn, over two miles from the World Trade Center, and that he had only briefly seen the plane fly by his location.

An on-site investigation by structural engineer W. Gene Corley and his team from Construction Technology Laboratories, based in Skokie, Illinois, photographed aircraft debris that was part of United Airlines Flight 175. Corley stated the wreckage was “from the United Airlines plane that hit Tower 2.” The team tracked the trajectory of fragments from United 175 that crashed through Tower 2, which included parts of an engine and landing gear, tearing through the north side of the South Tower.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce, investigated the WTC scene. They stated that burning fuel poured into the elevator shafts and was distributed throughout the building, including the lobbies. Some elevators containing people slammed down to ground level, and as the elevator doors automatically opened, flames and debris erupted into the lobby area.

An example of how burning fuel goes far beyond its source; a for-mer Navy pilot friend of mine crashed his Beech Baron into the top of a shopping mall in Concord, California, some years ago. Although the crash impact was at ground level, the burning fuel penetrated two floors below, severely burning several people.

The fact that the plane and its passengers never surfaced anywhere else should have made obvious the fact that the plane did crash into the World Trade Center. The theorists never addressed this obvious fact, which, if they had, would settle the matter right there.

Explosives brought down the WTC buildings The conspiracy theorists claimed that the World Trade Center

buildings were caused to collapse by explosives, which ignores such facts as: • No one saw the explosives being placed in position or the large

amount of explosives that would have had to be placed in position in prominent places.

• Bringing the explosives into the buildings would require bypassing the large numbers of security guards, security cameras, and other people.

• The people who placed the explosives would have had to know on what floors to place the explosives, which would be the floors on which the aircraft hit the building. Even the terrorists didn’t know where in the building they would crash.


• People would have to be in place to cause the explosives to ex-plode, and not be detected.

• For those conspiracy buffs that claimed the explosives were at ground level, their theory ignores the fact that the collapse of the two main buildings started at the floors where the aircraft impacted. They ignore the fact that professionals explained how and why the

two main buildings collapsed. The supports that held the floors to the outer structure weakened by the fire and heat, caused that floor to col-lapse onto the lower floor, which then exceeded the capability of the supporting brackets on that floor, resulting in a pancaking effect until all of the floors had collapsed to the ground. The unusual design of the World Trade Center buildings, unlike any other known high-rise build-ing worldwide, made the collapse possible. Instead of having support-ing columns throughout the buildings, the primary support for each of the floors were attachments to the outer walls and columns. The heat from the burning jet fuel and interior building contents caused the steel supports to weaken, causing the floor to collapse. When it did, it ex-erted a force on the lower floor that was higher than the supports could handle, causing that floor to collapse.

Building 7 in the World Trade Center complex was caused to collapse by explosives Experts in the field of accident investigations explained the col-

lapse of Building 7. That building suffered structural damage on one side from the debris cascading out from the collapse of the main Trade Center buildings. This damage caused fires to occur in Building 7, which raged for hours, fueled by oil storage tanks at various floors used to power backup generators. These fuel tanks were automatically kept full by fuel pressure lines coming from main fuel storage tanks below ground level.

An NIST investigator stated: “On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom, approximately ten stories, about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.” NIST discovered damage to other areas, including the southwest corner and to upper stories.

NIST felt that this structural damage, along with the intense fire, resulted in the progressive collapse. NIST also pointed to the unusual design, similar to the unusual design of the two WTC towers that re-sulted in a building collapse that probably would not have occurred if the standard design had not been ignored.


Absence of melted steel in the buildings eliminated the possibility that the building collapsed because of the fire and heat Steel does not have to melt to lose its strength. Diesel fuel started

the initial fire, which fed other material in the buildings. Jet fuel burns at between 800 to 1500 degrees Fahrenheit, while steel melts at 2750 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100 degrees Fahrenheit, which is within the range of burning jet fuel. At 1800 degrees, steel loses about 90 percent of its strength.

A pod on the bottom of United Airlines Flight 175 that hit the South Tower had a bomb or a missile attached That charge, possibly more ridiculous than any of the others, ig-

nored the following: • It would take considerable time to install missile-holding assem-

blies to the underside of the wings, plus the wiring to cause the missiles to fire. And this would have to be done with dozens of maintenance and service people blind to what was being done.

• The dozens if not hundreds of people servicing and maintaining the aircraft, plus the pilots who conduct walk-around inspections of the aircraft before flight, would have to be blind to the massive missile assembly under the wing. Plus, airport tower personnel, other pilots in aircraft at the terminal and while taxiing for takeoff, would have to be blind. Seismic tracings indicated bomb explosions brought down the World Trade Center buildings That theory is debunked by seismographs from the observatory in

Palisades, a part of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, New York, about 20 miles north of the World Trade Center. Seismologists at the observatory, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam, stated, “There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers.” They added, “That representation of our work [by conspirators] is categorically incorrect and not in context.”

The report released by the observatory showed the initial impact produced by the planes crashing into the towers, and then a gradual rise in the seismic waves as the buildings started to crash to the ground; not an immediate spike as would be seen if there were an explosion at ground level causing the towers to collapse. The seismic waves started small and as the buildings collapsed, they escalated, rather than an ini-tial sharp rise as would occur from an explosion.

The Pentagon Was Not Struck by a Plane, But by a Missile The conspiracy buffs claim that the width of the Pentagon damage

did not match the width of the wingspan of American Airlines Flight


77, a Boeing 757 with a wingspan of 125 feet. They ignored the follow-ing: • Parts of the American Airlines plane were scattered inside the Pen-

tagon, including one of the recorders, and parts were on the lawn outside of the Pentagon. One of the first people at the scene was structural engineer Allyn E. Kilsheimer, Chief Operation Officer of KCE Structural Engineers of Washington, D.C. He stated that he picked up parts of the aircraft on the lawn and found one of the air-craft recorders. He stated, “I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts.” He also stated seeing marks from one of the wings on the heavy reinforced concrete walls that did not collapse from the impact. The aircraft engines were found inside the Pentagon, along with one of the aircraft re-corders. The NTSB had one of the recorders, as one of the employ-ees told me, and it was damaged to such an extent that it was un-readable.

• A plane diving into a building can easily create a relatively narrow hole if it were to dive into the building in a steep bank. Even though the Boeing 757 had a wingspan of about 125 feet, the width of the damage would be considerably less than the width of the wings.

• The plane and its passengers were never found anywhere else. • Radar tracings showed the American Airlines plane’s path ending at

the Pentagon. United Airlines Flight 93 That Crashed in Pennsylvania, Alleg-edly shot Down With Heat-Seeking Missile. Conspiracy buffs argue that a white jet was seen in the area where

United Flight 93 crashed, that it was a Air Force or U.S. Customs jet, and that it had a missile that shot down the United flight. Air traffic control and radar records show that there was only one jet in the area and that was a Falcon 20 business jet operated by VF Corporation of Greensboro, North Carolina. That plane was asked by air traffic con-trollers to look over the area where United Flight 93 had disappeared from the radar screen. When it descended and looked over the site, they reported smoke coming from a hole in the ground.

There were no Muslims on board the aircraft, and some of the people identified as terrorists are still living. Airport video cameras showed Muslims passing through airport se-

curity in Boston. Although there is some controversy about certain of the named Muslims it is possible that identity theft could have oc-curred, or that there was more than one person with a similar name; as


in the United States, with Smith, or Jones, or some other common name.

No fighter jets were sent aloft to intercept the airliners as they were ordered to stand down. That argument ignores the following:

• Reports from several government sources state that aircraft were dispatched. Two F-15s were scrambled from Otis Air Force Base, in Falmouth, Massachusetts, by NEADS, within minutes of being informed by Boston Air Traffic Control Center. Three F-16s were scrambled from Langley Air National Guard based in Hampton, Virginia. None of these planes reached the hijacked aircraft.

• There could have been delays because transponders had been shut off in several of the aircraft, making the planes’ positions unavail-able to the air traffic controllers at their regular screens. Also, the events of 9/11 had never confronted air traffic controllers before, and they had no way of knowing that a never-before hijacking of that nature was occurring.

• Further, intercepts by NORAD were intended primarily for aircraft penetrating the Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ), which is a line outside U.S. borders. They were not intended to intercept air-craft in the United States that were off-course or not in communica-tion with air traffic controllers. The only known intercept of a non-military aircraft occurred when air traffic controllers failed to re-ceive any radio communications from the Learjet carrying golfer Payne Stewart (October 1999) that went far off course and contin-ued to climb to its maximum altitude before running out of fuel and crashing. Air traffic controllers asked the military to check on the aircraft.

The terrorists were incapable of flying sophisticated airliners. That claim ignores the fact that a number of the terrorists had pilot experience and pilot licenses. Once a commercial airliner is in the air, anyone with limited piloting experience can fly and maneuver the aircraft, without knowing the sophisticated systems, operating procedures, and emergency procedures that a professional airline pilot must know.

Crash victim Barbara Olson arrested in Europe. This bizarre claim appeared on the TomFlocco.com Internet site four years after she perished in one of the aircraft hijacked on Sep-tember 11, 2001, and was repeated on several other conspiracy websites. The ridiculous statements included: “The alleged 9.11 Pentagon crash victim was found to be in possession of millions in fake interbank Italian lyra currency, according to the agents. Olson was also reportedly in possession of a fraudulent Vatican passport


and was held on charges of counterfeiting.” How stupid can people be! And how stupid can believers in such thrash be!

.The pulverizing of the concrete structure resulted not from the fal-ling building but from explosives.

If that claim were correct, it would mean that explosives were placed along every wall of the two main WTC buildings, from the ground level to the very top. This in turn required massive amounts of explosives; the placement of massive amount of explosives by large numbers of people; the failure of the thousands of people in the buildings to have seen the explosives, among other problems. People Standing on Their Seats For Better Viewing of the Missiles In March 2005 I was a speaker at a rally in the Los Angeles area

where some of the speakers were conspiracy theorists, and some were promoting causes that I thought ridiculous. However, I agreed to be a speaker in the belief that I could make some of them aware of the cor-ruption that I and a group of other former government agents had discovered.

One of the speakers, a popular talk show host on the conspiracy cir-cuit, Joyce Riley, showed a film of the United 767 flying into one of the World Trade Center towers, excitedly explaining and pointing out a shadow that she claimed were the missiles under the wings.

As she excitedly described this scenario, hundreds of people jumped onto their chairs to get a better view. Afterwards she was given an award for her heroic exposure.

Several weeks earlier she had asked me to appear as a guest on her show, and when I found out about her preposterous beliefs, I cancelled and stated that I didn’t think my views would coincide with hers.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

Second Phase of Complicity By Federal Judges

ears earlier when I faced a block from Justice Department per-sonnel and members of Congress, I attempted to use another legal means to report evidence of the deadly activities into a

government record that would force attention to these matters. Two federal statutes make this possible. One, the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, makes it a crime if anyone who knows of a federal crime does not promptly report it to a federal judge or other federal official. The statute reads:

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowl-edge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

That statute also requires a federal judge to receive the information about a federal crime offered by anyone, as part of the judge’s manda-tory administrative duties.

Another statute that requires a federal judge to address the issues is Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361, which permits any citizen the right to seek a court order requiring a federal official to comply with the law and to halt unlawful conduct:

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original ju-risdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an of-

Y


ficer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to per-form a duty owed to the plaintiff.

I first attempted to report the federal crimes that I discovered as a

federal aviation safety agent by filing papers in the federal courts at San Francisco and Los Angeles. Initially, the district and appellate judges acknowledged the seriousness of the charges in the Complaint, but after Justice Department lawyers filed motions to dismiss and prevent me from reporting these matters, federal judges dismissed the action, claiming I lacked standing to report the criminal activities—the ones that were resulting in a series of continuing fatal airline crashes! These obstruction of justice tactics made possible the continuation of the conditions that were then involved in even worse aviation disas-ters. After I published books showing this relationship and naming some of the federal judges, there was a strong self-interest in prevent-ing these matters from being exposed. Some years later, starting in 1986, as my activist activities became widely known, they caused other government agents to start providing me information and evidence of criminal activities in other government offices and covert government operations. Attempts to report these mat-ters to Justice Department personnel and members of Congress encoun-tered the same cover-ups as I initially encountered while a federal agent. I then again sought to report these criminal activities to a federal judge under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute. .

These areas of other criminal activities, described in my various books, included, for instance, CIA drug smuggling, the October Sur-prise operation, massive corruption in the federal bankruptcy courts, corruption in the FBI, CIA involvement in the savings and loan and other financial frauds; illegal funding and arming of Iraq during the 1980s, among other areas of corrupt and criminal activities.

The first of these later attempts to report the criminal activities to a federal judge through legal filings occurred in the U.S. district court at Sacramento, California, and was assigned to U.S. District Judge Milton Schwartz. During the first hearing, Schwartz acknowledged the seri-ousness of my allegations and suggested I obtain legal counsel to pre-sent the matter.

That was impractical. In most cases lawyers do not want to antago-nize their peers in government. The cost of legal representation would be a problem. And I didn’t need a lawyer to present the information and evidence that I had accumulated. Further, a lawyer would be an im-pediment in trying to report and expose corruption in powerful gov-

Second Phase of Complicity by Federal Judges 413

ernment offices. A week after that hearing, without the legally required notice and a

hearing, Schwartz dismissed my action and issued an unlawful and un-constitutional order terminating my right to file any papers in federal courts.

As I later discovered information about other areas of conduct con-stituting federal crimes in government offices I again sought to report these matters to a federal judge. In response, U.S. Attorney David Levy, Sacramento, and Judge Schwartz, charged me with criminal contempt of court for having violated the obviously unlawful order terminating my right to file papers in federal court, or to bar me from reporting criminal activities.

I was being charged with criminal contempt of court for attempting to report criminal activities, some of which were continuing to result in aviation disasters, and others that were inflicting great harm upon major national interests, including national security.

Federal judges denied me a jury trial and sentenced me to six months in federal prison. While in prison, federal judges rendered or-ders seizing and liquidating the $10 million in assets that funded my exposure activities. These orders were rendered without the legal and constitutional requirement of a hearing, notice of hearing, and legally required cause. In addition, another order was rendered barring me from filing any objections to the seizure. And when I did exercise the legal and constitutional right to file an objection, the objection was un-filed and I was again charged with criminal contempt of court.

Last Attempt Before Pre-9/11 to Report Culture and Corruption in Aviation And Intelligence Offices Shortly before the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11, I again

sought to report the criminal activities, which included those in the government’s aviation safety offices that I had initially discovered and documented as a government agent.

Because I was barred from filing any papers in the federal district courts in California, I filed that action in Reno, Nevada. It was assigned to Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr. Again, that federal judge blocked me from reporting the criminal activities, some of which would be respon-sible for the conditions that enabled four groups of hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11.

That lawsuit also sought relief from massive civil rights violations that were part of the scheme to halt my exposure activities. That scheme consisted of a sham lawsuit filed by the CIA-front law firm of Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Francisco. That and related lawsuits violated large numbers of state and federal laws for which multiple fed-eral remedies existed. For the CIA-front to succeed, California and fed-


eral judges repeatedly violated the protections in law. Every time I ex-ercised defenses specifically provided by law California and federal judges, seemingly acting in concert, called the filings frivolous—thereby reversing the legal and common sense definition of the term. I faced a series of Kangaroo Courts.

During this attempt to report the serious misconduct in the govern-ment’s aviation safety offices, the events of 9/11 occurred. I then filed a declaration in that lawsuit (January 22, 2004) reporting in greater detail the misconduct that created the conditions enabling four groups of ter-rorists to hijack four airliners on the fateful day.

Despite the gravity of my charges and the horrendous national con-sequences if even a few of them were true, Judge Reed refused to re-ceive details and evidence. Instead, he dismissed the filing and ordered me to pay financial sanctions for filing the action.

I filed a notice of appeal, and paid the filing fee, but was blocked from filing appeal briefs by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal judges James R. Browning, Andrew J. Kleinfeld, and Ronald M.Gould. They held that I was permanently barred from filing papers in the federal courts by an earlier order in 1991 by San Francisco federal district judge Marilyn Patel. Ironically, Judge Browning was involved in one of the first attempts to report the criminal activities in the government’s avia-tion safety offices that I filed shortly after leaving the FAA and while major preventable airline crashes were occurring. He surely would not want me to proceed.

First Post 9/11 Attempt in Federal Courts at Washington, D.C. My first attempt after 9/11 to report the criminal activities, with

emphasis on misconduct constituting the primary blame for the condi-tions that enabled terrorists to hijack four airliners, was with a federal court filing in the U.S. district court in Washington, D.C.

I felt that the judge would be required to receive the information since it was at Washington, D.C. that one of the hijacked planes crashed into the Pentagon. Further, media sources routinely look at papers filed in the federal courts, and surely, I thought, they would give publicity to such a filing made by a former federal aviation safety agent.

At first, the court refused to file the Complaint, writing on the re-turned complaint that by judicial order of September 21, 1991, the judge permanently barred me from filing any papers in the federal courts. I then sent letters to the Supreme Court justices advising them of the latest attempt by federal judges blocking me from reporting criminal activities and exercising due process remedies. The complaint was then filed on June 12, 2002, and assigned to district judge Henry


H. Kennedy, Jr. Continuation of Judicial Obstruction of Justice Kennedy promptly dismissed the filing without notice, thereby vio-

lating numerous due process rights and also the requirement to receive evidence of alleged criminal activities. I then filed a notice of appeal and filed an appellate brief on December 9, 2002. But appellate judges Douglas H. Ginsburg, David B. Sentelle, and R. Raymond Randolph, refused to act on the brief, dismissing the appeal without any hearing. They sought to support blocking the reports of criminal activities and the denial of federal remedies on the basis of a prior unlawful and un-constitutional order issued twelve years earlier, in 1991, by judge Stanley Sporkin. That order was issued by Sporkin as he dismissed a prior lawsuit seeking to report the criminal activities that I and a group of other government agents had discovered.

That unlawful and unconstitutional order by Sporkin, a former CIA legal counsel—that blocked the reporting of criminal activities—was upheld en banc by the other appellate judges. Considering that the Dis-trict of Columbia appellate judges are the most powerful appellate in the United States, below the U.S. Supreme Court, this didn’t say much for the status of integrity and honesty in the federal courts.

Documented Evidence of Criminal Acts by Federal Judges It is a criminal offense for anyone, including federal judges, to

block the reporting of a federal crime, and the offense is not predicated on whether the reports of criminal activities are true or not. Since the series of judges blocking me from making these reports is well docu-mented in court records, it requires only an honestly functioning Justice Department to prosecute these judges and bring about their removal and incarceration. But since Justice Department personnel were repeat-edly implicated, this will never happen.

If the reports of corruption in the government’s aviation safety of-fices, and in the intelligence community, had not been blocked by Sporkin and the appellate judges in 1991, or any of the other judges, it is probable that the conditions enabling four groups of hijackers to seize four airliners would have been addressed, as well as conditions causing great harm upon national security and the lives of people in other areas.

Filing Papers in Federal Courts at 9/11 Disaster Site Most of the lawsuits filed by families of the 9/11 victims were filed in the U.S. district courts within blocks of where the World Trade Cen-ter tragedies occurred. And that is where I filed papers seeking to report misconduct that played key roles in the catastrophic events.

I submitted a lawsuit for filing on August 8, 2002, which by law must be filed the same day it is received, since the papers were in order


and the filing fees paid. Among the federal claims raised in the lawsuit were those violations of federally protected rights that were part of par-allel efforts to block me from reporting the criminal activities.

Federal Judge Blocked the Filing for 13 Months In clear violation of federal filing requirements, and the criminal

statute requiring federal judges to receive information and evidence of federal crimes, the filing was blocked for 13 months. It was finally filed on September 22, 2003, after I sent letters to each of the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court complaining of the latest misconduct by federal judges over whom they had supervisory responsibilities.

Simultaneous with the long-delayed filing, U.S. district judge Mi-chael B. Mukasey entered a five-page order dismissing it. That sua sponte dismissal, without notice and right to be heard, violated criminal and civil statutes and constitutional provisions. The dismissal prevented attention being focused on the areas of primary blame for the successful hijackings of four aircraft, and would continue the long pattern of catastrophic consequences.

In response to the sua sponte dismissal, I filed a notice of appeal, in accordance with law. That appeal put the judges in the federal appellate court at New York City on record of being informed about the serious charges. In response to the notice of appeal, a scheduling order was issued, requiring me and the U.S. attorney to file respective briefs.

Blocking the Filing of Revealing Brief I submitted the Appellant brief on January 5, 2004, which was re-

ceived by the court on January 7, 2004. As in the federal district court, it’s filing was unlawfully blocked. It wasn’t until nearly a month later that it was filed, and only after I again wrote letters complaining of the latest filing irregularity.

Justice Department Lawyers Failed to File Their Brief The scheduling order required the U.S. attorney to file their brief

by February 12, 2004. If it had been filed, the Justice Department law-yers would have to either continue the history of blocking reports of the corrupt and criminal acts that former federal agents sought to report and which enabled 9/11 to occur, or admit the existence of the criminal ac-tivities and cover-ups. After a delay of almost two months, I filed a mo-tion for an order to require the U.S. attorney to file their brief, and for sanctions. The U.S. attorney then filed its brief. I followed with a Reply Brief. After receiving our briefs, the court scheduled oral argument to occur on August 24, 2004.

Oral Argument in Court of Appeals, New York City, I appeared and presented oral argument before the three appellate

panel judges, Jose A. Cabranes; Chester J. Straub, and Richard C.


Wesley. In New York City, oral argument before the court of appeals are very formal, more so than on the West Coast. I noticed that with the lawyers presenting oral argument before I appeared, that the judges rarely looked at the speaker. In my case, I noticed that all three judges constantly had their eye on me, causing me to wonder why. The follow-ing was my oral argument:

Good morning, I am the appellant in this appeal, appearing in pro se, and my name is Rodney Stich. In the ten minutes allotted, Appellant will attempt to show the close relationship between the latest due process and civil violations with the continuing attempts to block Appellant, a former federal agent, from reporting criminal activities that he and a group of other former government agents discovered. These reports were being made under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 USC Section 4. Appellant first discovered certain of these federal crimes after he was given the assignment to correct the conditions respon-sible for the worst series of airline crashes in the nation’s history.

Among the multiple federal causes of actions stated in Appel-lant’s complaint, and the issues brought to this court, are the fol-lowing:

Under the federal crime reporting statute, Appellant has at-tempted to report to a federal judge the criminal activities against the United States, under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 USC Section 4. Every attempt to report these deadly activities had been blocked, and the latest block was done in the lower court.

Two of the federal causes of actions arise under the Supreme Court’s void judgment doctrine.

Federal judges have issued a series of unlawful and unconstitu-tional orders forever barring Appellant from filing any papers in the federal district and appellate courts.

The effect and intent of these orders were to block Appellant from reporting the criminal activities to a federal court, and to block Appellant from exercising the federal defenses needed to halt the ongoing massive violations of state and federal laws that were part of the legal schemes to halt his exposure activities.

These orders violate the due process and equal protection guarantees of the Constitution, and deprive Appellant the defenses guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States. At this time, anyone can perpetrate any violation upon Appellant through sham legal actions and Appellant cannot exercise the de-fenses in the laws and Constitution of the United States.

After the first of these unlawful orders were rendered in the


Ninth Circuit courts, Appellant discovered additional criminal ac-tivities. As required by the federal crime reporting statute, and granted by federal rights, Appellant sought to report these criminal activities, and also exercised federal defenses seeking to h alt the great and irreparable personal and financial harm he was suffering from the violations of federally protected rights.

A U.S. attorney and federal judges then retaliated against Ap-pellant for attempting to report these criminal activities and for ex-ercising defenses guaranteed to all citizens by the laws and Consti-tution of the United States. Appellant was denied a jury trial and sentenced to six months in federal prison.

While in prison, federal judges rendered unlawful and uncon-stitutional orders seizing and liquidating Appellant’s $10 million in assets that Appellant foolishly used to fund his exposure activities.

These orders were combined with an order barring Appellant from filing any objections. When Appellant exercised his legal and constitutional right to object to the seizure of his life assets, a fed-eral judge charged him with criminal contempt of court for having exercised that legal and constitutional right, denied him a jury trial, and sentenced him again to federal prison.

Several tactics were used to block appellant from reporting the criminal activities, and to block Appellant from exercising federal defenses.

Every action was dismissed at the pleading stage, often sua sponte dismissals, and always during the initial filing stages.

Seeking to justify the dismissals, the standard practice was to reverse the legal and common sense definition of frivolous and call Appellant’s filings frivolous. Exercising federal remedies for the most outrageous, and record-setting violations of state and federal laws, a frivolous label was promptly placed.

A classic example. In a lawsuit filed by a CIA-front law firm, the violations of state and federal laws that barred the action in-cluded (a) over 36 California and federal statutes; (b) over a dozen rules of court; (c) several landmark Supreme Court decisions; (d) major constitutional protections, for which federal defenses existed for any one of these violations under the Civil Rights Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act. Appellant was suffering great and ir-reparable financial and personal harm from the violations. Despite all this, federal judges repeatedly placed a frivolous label on Ap-pellant’s exercise of federal defenses.

Federal judges blocked every due process protection, barring appellant from having the federal claims adjudicated on their mer-


its. Instead, every action was given a frivolous label and dismissed. Judge Mukasey enlarged upon this tactic, falsely stating in his

sua sponte dismissal order that each of the claims had been adjudi-cated on the merits; that they were found to be without merit; that Appellant was a vexatious litigant filing frivolous actions.

Included in the relief sought from this appellate court are the following:

Order that permits appellant and his group of other former government agents to provide information, testimony, and evidence, of the criminal activities that they discovered during their official duties.

An Order holding the series of permanent injunctions unlawful, unconstitutional, and void, returning to Appellant the same due process and equal protection rights guaranteed to everyone else.

Order holding that the unlawful and unconstitutional orders seizing and liquidating appellant’s life assets are void, and that the title and possession of the properties be returned to the status that they were in when they were ordered seized.

Simply returning this case to the lower courts would be the equivalent of continuing the same tactics. The only remedy Appel-lant knows is for this court to provide an adequate federal court fo-rum for Appellant and several other former government agents to provide information, testimony and evidence.

Since the massive due process and civil violations were an in-tegral part of the felony obstruction of justice actions, this court should adjudicate on the merits the causes of actions under the Civil Rights Act, Bivens, RICO, Declaratory Judgment Act, and Federal Tort Claims Act.

In closing, appellant makes the following statement to show how this misconduct appellant had caused, and enabled to be in-flicted, catastrophic harm upon the United States, with heavy loss of life. The blowback is only one day’s consequences, and in only one of the areas affected by the corruption that Appellant and other government agents sought to report, were the conditions that en-abled terrorists to seize hijack four airliners on 9/11:

The hijackings of four airliners on 9/11 were primarily aviation disasters. The need and the means to prevent airliner hijackings have been known for years. The authority and responsibility to or-der these preventive measures existed throughout this period by people in certain government aviation safety offices.

Deep-seated corruption and criminal misconduct existed in certain areas of the government’s aviation safety offices that pre-vented the government from carrying out its federal aviation safety


responsibilities. That includes blocking the known preventative measures against airliner hijackings.

The areas of primary blame enabling terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11 were with the people in the government’s aviation safety offices engaged in the corruption and criminal activities; those people, some of whom are referred to in Appellant’s present and prior complaints, blocked Appellant from reporting the crimi-nal activities. The people who retaliated against Appellant for at-tempting to report the criminal activities; Those involved in the le-gal actions that were dual efforts to halt Appellant’s exposure ac-tivities; Those who knew of the criminal activities, or knew of the obstruction of justice and failed to halt these obstruction of justice activities. Responsibilities of Federal Appellate Judges The law clearly states that appellate judges must examine the Com-

plaint filed in the district court de novo (from the beginning), and must accept the allegations stated in the complaint as true for opposing dis-missal. If a single federal cause of action is stated in the complaint, the dismissal by the lower court judge must be reversed.

Tactics by Appellate Judges Were Different Than Expected It took the Appellate panel only two days to issue an order uphold-

ing the district court’s blocking of reports of criminal activities, and the related procedural and substantive violations related to my claims aris-ing out of the legal actions seeking to halt my exposure activities.

I did not expect the three appellate court judges to be so brazen in continuing the felony obstruction of justice and the violations of so many due process violations that openly violated large numbers of fed-eral statutes, case law, and constitutional protections. I anticipated that the court of appeal judges would send the case back to the district court, where various legal tactics would continue to block the reporting of the criminal activities and the parallel violations of massive numbers of state and federal laws and constitutional protections.

Petition for Rehearing En Banc I then submitted for filing on September 7, 2004, a petition for re-

hearing en banc to the court of appeals in New York City. Such a peti-tion requires that every judge in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals receive a copy of the petition for rehearing and enter a decision as to whether they will hear the case.

The Entire Second Circuit Court of Appeals Became Complicit The entire judicial staff of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals

then refused to grant a rehearing, thereby approving the obstruction of


justice and serious judicial misconduct. They added their names to the long list of federal judges complicit in some of the worst tragedies af-fecting the United States, and becoming complicit in subsequent trage-dies arising from the misconduct.

Included in the consequences of judicial cover-ups and obstruction of justice include (a) preventable aviation disasters, such as the latest airliner hijackings occurring on 9/11; (b) continuation of corruption in the FBI and the CIA; (c) continuation of misconduct in the three branches of government that continue to inflict great harm upon the American public and the United States itself.

Crash scene at the Pentagon on 9/11


It is ironic that certain personnel at United Airlines created, or

aided and abetted, the corrupt practices and culture in the Federal Avia-tion Administration that enabled the conditions to exist that resulted in the loss of two United Airlines aircraft on 9/11.

In “memory” of those people, it is only fitting to show how that same misconduct enabled a United Airlines disaster to occur in New York City years earlier. That disaster and several others was the reason why FAA personnel in the Los Angeles offices asked me to volunteer for the assignment to correct the conditions responsible for many of that airline’s disasters. I accepted the assignment, and the consequences will follow me to my grave.

United Airlines DC-8 crash into the Brooklyn borough of NYC


Removing bodies from United DC-8 New York City Crash


Stephen Baltz, the little boy who was the only survivor in the United Airlines DC-8—living for a couple of days. He, like the other victims, were no match for those engaging in, or covering up for the corruption that made that and many other disasters possible. Over the years, he would be joined by many others.

CHAPTER TWELVE

Media People Complicity

ost of the broadcast and print media personnel protected the people involved in the corruption that resulted in decades of preventable airline disasters. I first started contacting media

people while I was still an FAA inspector, describing the corruption related to several recent airline disasters, describing my professional and official position, and offering evidence. Not a single one re-sponded.

In later years, as I discovered corruption in other areas of govern-ment, some of the information and evidence provided to me by the in-creasing numbers of other government personnel who contacted me after learning of my activities, I encountered the same cover-up. These additional areas involved criminal, subversive, and treasonous activities of people in government positions and covert government operations. There were various reasons for covering up, including, for instance: • Many people in the broadcast and print media have been on the

payroll of the CIA and other government offices for years, the in-tent being to either put a good spin on a story, withhold a story from being made available to the public, or engaging in outright ly-ing or acting as shills to protect high-level officials and covert ac-tivities. Highly detailed books have been written about this prob-lem.

• Another self-serving reason was to continue the favorable relation-ship with particular government offices. Either they cover up for the corruption in certain government offices or they would no longer receive government handouts, no longer be permitted to at-tend White House briefings, or would be barred from transportation facilities when the president of the United States went on some type of tour.

M


• Herd mentality of many reporters, following the general line being printed by other media sources.

• Avoiding the attacks from other media sources when exposing a serious form of misconduct in government offices or covert opera-tion. Other media sources, acting as shills for government, or on the secret payroll of some particular government entity, attack the one courageous source that reveals high-level corruption.

• Laziness of some reporters who simply report as news the handouts given to them by people in government.

• Managing editors who for various reasons refuse to print the sto-ries.

• Managing editors who retaliate against reporters who report serious corruption in government offices.

• Fear of the financial consequences if the public learned and under-stood the extent of the corruption in government offices.

• Prior complicity through cover-ups motivated continuing the cover-ups.

This book focuses more on the events of 9/11, and does not go into de-tail concerning these matters as my other books, such as Defrauding America and Drugging America. However, a few references are given here.

Media and Politician Spin—Dumbing Down the People The polite word used for lying by media figures or politicians is

“spin,” and it dumbs down the people, insulting their intelligence. Questions presented to politicians on radio and television shows are usually sidestepped, or a totally non-responsive answer given; or out-right lies.

Sometimes there is an element of truth in the response—to give it the appearance of accuracy—and then followed with spin, or more ac-curately, lies. This results in a totally false answer. The extent and se-verity of the lies have increased continually during 40 years that I have been closely monitoring government conduct, starting while I was a government insider. It required, and continues to require, massive col-lusion of people in the broadcast and print media, for this deception of the public to continue.

Lawyers use it all the time. And the more preposterous, the greater the required naiveté of the media and the public. Possibly this is one reason why the media uses politicians rather than experts to explain aviation disasters or other matters that have links to misconduct in gov-ernment.

Media Personnel as Shills For Corrupt Politicians Many media people have become shills for politicians and other

Media People Complicity 427

government bureaucrats, willingly aiding and abetting the lies and the cover-ups, regardless of the tragic consequences to the country and to the people.

Regurgitating Government Propaganda/Lies In the book, Bias, former CBS insider, Bernard Goldberg, reveals

how the media distorts the news. Goldberg described how reporters routinely regurgitated the propaganda of pressure groups and govern-ment agencies to the detriment of honest reporting, and how fairness, balance, and integrity have disappeared from network television. Gold-berg was in high CBS offices for three decades and had received seven Emmy awards and had been featured in TV Guide. Goldberg wrote:

If learning anything after all these years as a network newsman, I know this much: never-never! underestimate how low news execu-tives, and TV people in general, will go in the pursuit of higher rat-ings. If CBS, ABC, and NBC news could frighten main street Amer-ica, they would. Spinning the Spinners Many reporters or television commentators spin the spinners. They

put good spin on the lies of politicians that they support. In today’s level of comprehension by the public, the politician with the best spin and presentation can gain control of the most powerful office in the world. Never in the nation’s history has the comment by Mark Twain been more prominent: “There are three kinds of lies: lies; damned lies; and statistics.” Wall Street Journal Editorial Reversing the Facts A Wall Street Journal editorial (January 9, 2002) by publisher Pe-ter R. Kann, covering half the page, stated the very opposite of what I had observed for many years:

This progress report carries forward a custom begun 25 years ago. It reflects our belief that publishing a newspaper is a public trust for which we are accountable first of all to you our readers. … that quality, above all, is what the Journal prides itself on providing to its readers. It’s a quality that has never been more essential than in these months of cascading news events. … the response to these challenges has left me as proud of this publication, and as optimis-tic about its prospects, as I have ever been in the 20 years I have been responsible for it.

This hypocrisy fails to mention that I had been making the Wall Street Journal aware for the past 30 years of the corruption that I and other government agents had discovered. I had even filed a lawsuit


against the Wall Street Journal in 1990 on the basis of its cover-up of criminal activities implicating government officials.

Frank Admission of Media News Alterations Christiane Amanpour, one of CNN’s top war correspondents at the

time, stated during CNBC’s Topic A With Tina Brown: I think the press was muzzled, and I think the press self-muzzled. I’m sorry to say, but certainly television and, perhaps, to a certain extent, my station was intimidated by the administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News. And it did, in fact, put a climate of fear and self-censorship, in my view, in terms of the kind of broadcast work we did. Public Relation Firms and the CIA The CIA uses public relations firms to perform domestic activities

that the CIA is barred by law from doing. Washington-based Hill & Knowlton, for instance, acted as a conduit for propaganda news re-leases to the media. The firm had numerous CIA and other intelligence agency personnel on its board of directors. Robert Gray, who created and operated Hill and Knowlton since 1961 had numerous contacts with the CIA and other intelligence groups and with such CIA person-nel as William Casey, Edwin Wilson, Oliver North, and Robert Owen. Gray also formed his own company with CIA contacts and was on the Board of Directors of several covert CIA companies that fronted for Task Force 157, an Office of Naval Intelligence operation.

Covert Action, in its Spring 1993 issue, told how U.S. intelligence agencies use public relation firms, journalists, and authors to print what they want the American public to hear. The article reported, “In a typi-cal issue of the Wall Street Journal, more than half the news stories were based solely on [government-provided] press releases.” The arti-cle continued: “Reporters were paid by the CIA, sometimes without their media employer’s knowledge, to get the material in print or on the air.” They reported that news organizations ordered their writers to re-peat what was fed to them by the CIA.

A former CIA employee, Robert T. Crowley, whose job was to act as liaison with corporations, admitted that public relations firms are continuously used by the CIA “to put out press releases and make me-dia contacts.” The CIA’s use of U.S. media has been well detailed in publications related to the intelligence agencies. Much of what is stated as “news” by the media is really press releases from CIA-connected public relation firms. Author Susan Trento wrote:

Reporters were paid by the CIA, sometimes without their media employers’ knowledge, to get the material in print or on the air. But


other news organizations ordered their employees to cooperate with the CIA, including the San Diego-based Copley News Service. But Copley was not alone, and the CIA had “tamed” reporters and editors in scores of newspaper and broadcast outlets across the country. To avoid direct relationships with the media, the CIA re-cruited individuals in public relations firms like H&K to act as middlemen for what the CIA wanted to distribute.

The spring 1993 issue of Covert Action described the misleading

news given to the American public: In a typical issue of the Wall Street Journal, more than half the

news stories were based solely on press releases [from government personnel]. Hill and Knowlton...were perfect “cover” for the ever-expanding CIA. The CIA...used its H&K connections to put out press releases and make media contacts to further its positions. H&K employees at the small Washington office and elsewhere, dis-tributed this material through CIA assets working in the United States news media.

Since the CIA is prohibited from disseminating propaganda in-side the U.S., this type of “blowback”—which former CIA officer John Stockwell and other researchers have often traced to the Agency—is illegal. While the use of U.S. media by the CIA has a long and well-documented history, the covert involvement of PR firms may be news to many. Who Rules America? Covert Action described how reporters depend upon the close intel-

ligence community for much of their “news,” and how the media pro-tects these sources. An article written by the research staff of National Vanguard Books described the slanted news by the press and entertain-ment media: Who Rules America?

Their power...reaches into every home in America, and it works its will during nearly every waking hour. It is the power which shapes and molds the mind of virtually every citizen, young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated. The mass media form for us our image of the world and then tell us what to think about that im-age. Essentially everything we know—or think we know—about events outside our own neighborhood or circle of acquaintances comes to us via our daily newspaper, our weekly news magazine, our radio, or our television.

Employing carefully developed psychological techniques, they guide our thought and opinion...Most Americans fail to realize that they are being manipulated. Even the citizen who complains about


“managed news” falls into the trap of thinking that because he is presented with an apparent spectrum of opinion he can escape the thought controllers’ influence by believing the editor or commenta-tor of his choice. Every point on the permissible spectrum of public opinion is acceptable to the media master, and no impermissible fact or viewpoint is allowed any exposure at all, if they can prevent it. Media Circus In the book, Media Circus, by Washington Post media critic, the

author ridicules the lack of investigative reporting, absence of penetrat-ing insight, or newsworthy news that exists in America’s newspapers:

The nation’s watchdogs have become lap-dogs, and groveling spineless mutts at that. And nobody, the American public espe-cially, appears to give a thinker’s damn. Media Admission of Being CIA Fronts The Washington Post (February 16, 1996) described the CIA’s use

of American journalists and news organizations during “the past 19 years,” and even using them as cutouts or fronts for CIA activities. The article made reference to earlier discoveries “that the CIA had clandes-tine agents posing as American journalists for decades.”

Executive editor of the Washington Post, Leonard Downie, Jr., stated, “It’s disturbing to hear that the CIA has either used the cover of legitimate journalistic organizations without their knowledge, or some-body working for them has been recruited by the CIA.” CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said the use of the media is permitted by a regulation “waived by the agency’s director...and has been and continues to be the CIA’s policy.”

Over 800 News and Public Information Sources and Individu-als Controlled by People in the CIA A December 1977 article in the New York Times reported that in the

mid 1960s the CIA “owned, subsidized or otherwise influenced...more than 800 news and public information organizations and individuals.”

Americans Suffered Greatly for Media Cover-ups Americans have paid a terrible price for disinformation, corruption,

and determined ignorance of the decades of corruption by government personnel and in covert government operations. The price was paid in needless airline disasters and deaths; the drug smuggling into the United States by people in government positions; October Surprise; looting of the savings and loans; corruption in the federal courts, and


especially the bankruptcy courts, and the many other areas that I detail and document in my various books.

The conditions that enabled 9/11 to occur could not have existed without cover-ups by media personnel. The lies that got the United States embroiled in the war against Iraq and the massive blowbacks from that which will last for decades, would not have occurred if media personnel had not aided and abetted the corrupt activities that have to-day escalated as never before.

Important to Recognize this Problem is not Just Academic As with every other problem detailed in these pages, the cover-ups

by media people enabled to occur decades of grave consequences for major national interests, including national security; decades of pre-ventable airline disasters and deaths. The media people cover-ups have enabled many other corrupt activities to continue. And lastly, the 3,000 people who died on September 11, 2001, died because of corrupt activi-ties that media people knew to exist, which were covered up by them.


CHAPTER THIRTEEN

Gloomy Outlook for Americans

or many people, the corruption in government offices in the United States constitutes a greater threat and source of ongoing harm than any foreign terrorists. A continuous series of blatant

lies by people in government, and the cover-ups by almost every gov-ernment and non-government check and balance, have brought about a dismal and catastrophic future for America and many of its people. And not only in the areas covered by this book, but in virtually every area affecting the lives of the American people.

In one area after the other, what had been unthinkable in the past has become reality. Our form of government, and what were formerly constitutional rights, are being reconstructed. The protections the public thinks to exist are being prostituted by those paid and entrusted to up-hold these protections.

People say it is Impossible to Arouse the American Public Many people have said that the public is too unsophisticated, too

indolent, too engrossed in trivial matters, to show any interest in cor-rupt government politicians and other officials. Those who say the pub-lic will never respond may be right, and history has certainly supported that view. By 2005, I had appeared as guest and expert on over 3000 radio and television shows, describing the corruption and great harm that I and a group of other insiders had discovered in our professional and official positions. Callers expressed concern, and then did nothing.

Lack of Public Outrage and 9/11 One area where public apathy played a role in the events of 9/11

was its indifference to the deadly corruption in the government’s avia-tion safety offices. My books and radio-TV appearances certainly pro-vided sufficient information for people to show concern. That espe-cially pertains to the families of victims in preventable airline disasters.

F


Even they showed no interest. I found the same to exist among family members of 9/11 hijacking disasters.

It is probable that some of the people who perished on 9/11 from the hijackings of four airliners had heard my charges in the past and did nothing to help correct the conditions. If more of the public had reacted to the information I was making available, it is possible that the corrup-tion that created the conditions allowing hijackers to seize four airliners on 9/11 could have been corrected. The same can probably be said of subsequence victims; if family members of 9/11 victims, or the public, had reacted to the documented reports of corruption in government of-fices, many subsequent tragedies would not have occurred.

The same can be said of the harm resulting in other areas affected by corrupt government personnel. Many people have been sent to prison on drug charges based upon fraudulent actions of prosecutors and government informants and government agents.

Dozens of books have been written by insiders or those who care-fully researched the facts, showing the involvement in drug smuggling of CIA agents, White House politicians during the Contra operation, and still not reaction. Talk about being brain-dead, how much worse can it get!

As a result of the indifference, cowardice, or whatever, the lives of many people have been destroyed. Some of the innocents were sent to prison, some for life.

Price Paid for Cover-ups and Apathy Cover-ups have come with a heavy price. The guilty continue their corrupt and criminal activities; they remain in government offices and often upgrade their position. The tragedies continue, which in the avia-tion arena are deadly events—such as the 9/11 hijackings and many other aviation events.

Same Culture That Enabled Pearl Harbor to Occur Enabled Other Disasters, Including Events of 9/11

The success of the Japanese’s sneak attack upon Pearl Harbor re-sulted from the same deep-seated culture that enabled 9/11 to occur. I had been in the navy a year when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and could see the lackadaisical war preparations that existed. The same culture continued to this day, making possible a series of other tragic evens, including the hijackings of 9/11 that were so easily preventable. And in every instance, the deep-seated culture of cover-ups occurred, insuring that the underlying problems would con-tinue, along with the blowback consequences.

However, the culture of never addressing problems that existed prior to Pearl Harbor was compounded on 9/11 by corruption through-

Gloomy Outlook for Americans 435

out government offices and media cover-ups, as I briefly describe within these pages and more thoroughly in my other books. On the Sunday morning of the Pearl Harbor attack, radar personnel on Oahu spotted hundreds of aircraft approaching Oahu, from the Northwest. These reports of hundreds of aircraft were ignored on the basis that a few airplanes were due to arrive from the U.S. mainland—arriving from the opposite direction. The aircraft coming from Califor-nia would be coming from the east, not the northwest. In addition, a Japanese miniature sub was sunk at the entrance to Pearl Harbor several hours before the attack. Nothing alerted the many people in various government offices that had the responsibility to react.

Fifty Years of Hijackings, No Preventative Actions Taken The hijackings of 9/11 were preceded by fifty years of worldwide airliner hijackings, for which federal aviation personnel had the author-ity and the responsibility to order the known preventative actions. I re-peatedly reported the easy and inexpensive preventative measures that would have halted these hijackings, just as I reported many other pre-ventative measures to halt airline disasters from known safety prob-lems. I and other safety inspectors repeatedly reported the corruption in the government’s aviation safety offices responsible for blocking pre-ventative measures. Not a single one of the many people and groups responsible for reacting to these reports exercised their moral and legal responsibilities. So, on 9/11, 3,000 people were brutally killed, all of whom would be alive if this sordid culture did not exist. And this is only the tip of the vast areas of similar conduct throughout government and society.

Public’s Absence of Knowledge or Curiosity On Conduct of People in Government and Worldly Matters When it came to history and international events, or the wrongdo-

ings of White House politicians and the CIA, the American public was utterly lacking in knowledge or curiosity. They knew, or cared nothing, about the blowback effect of earlier meddling into the affairs of Middle East countries.

America’s Pontius Pilates With similarities to Pontius Pilate and the crucifixion of Jesus

Christ, most Americans wash their hands of the tragic consequences from corruption in government offices by remaining ignorant, indiffer-ent, of these matters. Or worse, who continue to support those in gov-ernment responsible for these offenses. They consider themselves righteous as they aid and abet the misconduct They go to church, they pray, they give money to the church and to charities, while supporting the people and the conduct that gives credence to the “Ugly American” title.


Don’t Take It Anymore! What America needs are more people like the person in the fic-

tional story, Network, who wouldn’t take it any longer. Here are a few of the steps that can be taken to at least start the process: • First, start showing an interest in significant matters affecting na-

tional and international interests. This requires reading the books written by insiders, and when there is misconduct described, react by helping to make this information known, and by demanding that members of congress investigate. Then, see that there isn’t a cover-up.

• Help publicize the contents of books that reveal misconduct. Con-tact radio talk shows, get on the Internet, and help publicize the problems.

• Explore the Internet for information about these matters. • Don’t accept as true statements made by TV and radio hosts. Rec-

ognize the lies, distortions, by such hosts as Russ Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, and the harm they are doing to vital U.S. interests.

• Send certified letters to your U.S. Senators and Representatives, demanding that they immediately investigate these matters. Expect to be stonewalled.

• If it is within your style, appear in front of federal buildings, espe-cially federal courts, with placards making reference to various matters brought up in the various books.

• If you know of criminal acts by government personnel, and if it is within your capability, report it in writing through a legal filing un-der Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. This statute requires any person knowing of federal crimes must report them to a federal court, or other gov-ernment official. Make formal reports, sent by certified mail, with copies to the newspapers and radio and TV stations, reporting the crimes stated within these pages. A few References to Famous Sayings:

• “All that is necessary for the forces of evil to triumph is that enough good men do nothing.”

• “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.” Samuel Adams.

• “We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth. For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to pro-vide for it.” Patrick Henry

• “I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God, I will do.” Edward Everett

Gloomy Outlook for Americans 437

Hale. The manner in which you and the public react to these exposures

will determine the fate of many people. The public has it within their power to destroy the cancerous government corruption described within these pages, and which have destructive influences throughout our so-ciety. Remember, what happened to the people shown in these pages, and what has yet to happen to others, could happen to you, or your loved ones.

Starting in 2007, thanks again to the endemic culture of corruption throughout government and throughout non-government entities, and again, thanks to the public’s continual disinterest in matters beyond the ball games, soccer moms, and other trivia, major segments of the American public suffered enormous personal and financial hardships from. And again, they couldn’t face that themselves helped make it possible. That was obvious from the large segment of the American voters that supported political candidates whose history—again beyond their realm of interest—played key roles in the unfolding financial trauma. All they had to make a judgment on was the off-the-shelf feel-good rhetoric, much of which was outright lies, and the charges hurled upon the other side reflected their own guilt.


INDEX

9/11 Commission, 1, 127, 138,

139, 208, 235, 355, 356, 357, 359, 374, 375, 387, 389, 390, 391

A A.B. Brown., 202 AAL 587, 227 Abouhalima, Mahmud, 83, 84, 129 Abu Nidal, 129 Acosta, William, 111, 114, 115 Adnan Awad, 239 Al Qaeda, 168, 208, 227, 393 Alaska airlines, 22 Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms

Bureau, 100, 109, 238 al-Ghadi, Omer, 239 Alitalia, 52, 146, 173 Alkifah, 129 Allegria, Pedro, 97, 110, 116 Allende, Salvador, 355 Amal Militia, 239 Amdocs, 213, 214, 217, 218 American Airlines, 2, 6, 45, 51,

192, 193, 201, 202, 221, 223, 227, 228-230, 236, 258, 347, 398, 407, 408

American Civil Liberties Union, 329

Ames, Aldrich, 233 Anderson, Jack, 241-243 Anglada, Raul, 96 Aranda, Andres, 99, 102 Arrow Air, 56, 57 Ashcroft, John, 215, 266, 289,

290, 298, 300, 308, 380 Atta, Mohamed, 236, 266, 267 Automated case support system

(ACS, 232 Avianca Airlines, 55, 56 Aviv, Juval, 72, 160 Awad, Adnan, 239 Ayers, Bradley, 238

B Bailey, Don, 136 Baker, Constance, 100, 101 Baker, James, 58 Batchelor, Betty, 57 Bay of Pigs, 93, 113, 117, 124 Bellinger, John, 135 Bergen County, 97 bin Laden, Osama, 87, 196, 228,

237, 239, 247, 297, 305, 306 Black Sunday, 54 Blakey, Marion, 226, 227 Blaum, Captain Rudy, 267 Blaum, Rudy, 267 Bodegas, 91, 93, 98, 102, 121 Bojinka, 85, 87, 88, 248 Boren, Sen. David, 54 Bouchard, Benoit, 57 Boudria, Don, 58 Breen, Kenneth, 203 Brown, Ron, 403 Buczek, Michael, 91 Bulger, James J., 233, 234, 264,

274 Bulger, William, 282, 283, 291,

381 Bush, George Sr. and Jr., 108, 120,

195, 316, 340, 349, 355

C Cabral, Cesar, 96 Cabranes, Jose A., 416 CALEA, 215, 216 Cali Drug Cartel, 74, 111, 132 Camarena, Alma, 99, 107, 108 Camp Peary, 240 Canadian Aviation Safety Board,

57, 58 Capital National Bank, 93, 112,

131 Caproni, U.S. Att. Valerie, 89,

153, 188, 207, 391, 393, 394


Central Intelligence Agency., 70, 73, 76, 79, 95, 139, 158, 161, 165, 167, 179, 202, 292, 356, 376, 381

Chile, 355 Christenson, Ray, 41 Cleveland, Derrick W., 203 Cobo, George, 137 Colombo Mafia group, 86, 168,

187, 206, 234, 246, 262, 263, 270-272, 283, 285, 391

Connolly, John, 233, 264, 265 Control Book Keeping, 94 Cook, Fred J., 38 Cooper, D.B., 50 Corbett, Tom, 134, 135 Cordoba, Carlos, 93, 112, 117 Crane, Richard, 242, 243 Crocker, Jeremy, 79, 156 Crosby, John S., 57 Cyprus Airways, 52

D Daley, FBI V. Stewart, 75-78, 164-

166 Dannemora, 266 Davis, Rep. Tom, 273, 274 De Dios, Manuel, 112, 113, 115,

125 Defense Intelligence Agency

(DIA), 173, 292 Dellapizzi, Louis, 102 DeVecchio, FBI Lindley, 88, 89,

153, 169, 187, 189, 206-208, 234, 246, 262, 265, 270-273, 283, 285, 286, 391, 394

Diaz, Simon, 94, 131 Diefenderfer, Mary Rose, 15, 22 Dinkins, David, 97, 98, 101, 118 Dominican Federation, 96, 97,

105, 112-114, 117-119, 123, 131

Donaldson, William, 172 Dresch, Stephen P., 391, 394 Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA), 90, 94, 105, 131, 241

Dunbar, FBI Carson, 84, 88

E Edde Airlines, 46 Eggles, Edward, 132 Egyptian Airlines, 55 El Al, 52, 227 Elgindy, Ibrahim, 203 Ellard, Jimmy, 56 Ervin, Sen. Sam, 27 Espinal, Pablo, 94 Estes, Billie Sol, 27, 44 Estey, William, 57

F Farooq, Mian, 266 Federal Aviation Administration,

2-16, 22-26, 28, 32, 36, 37, 39-46, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 75-80, 86, 125, 134, 138, 152, 153, 155, 157, 163-167, 170-172, 175, 176, 182, 191-193, 195-200, 203, 204, 208, 235, 236, 265, 270, 273, 275, 277, 278, 280, 282, 287, 290, 293-295, 297, 300-325, 327-329, 331, 333, 334, 338, 341-343, 345, 352-354, 360-364, 370-372, 376-379, 381-383, 387, 401, 414, 422, 425

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA , 26, 238

Feinstein, Sen. Dianne, 312, 340 Ferier, Fernando, 96 Fitzgerald, Patrick, 26, 188, 393,

394 Fitzgerald-Catalan, Darlene, 26 Ford, Glenn, 79, 156 Foreman, Percy, 36 Fox, FBI Jim, 104, 117, 120, 121,

123 Frankel, Stephen, 105 Freeh, FBI Louis, 117 Friedenthal, Edward, 109

Gloomy Outlook for Americans 441G

Gander, 56, 57, 58 Garcia, AUSA Michael, 249, 252,

393 Gardello, Ronald, 113 Garvey, Jane, 197 Gentile, Lou, 134 Ginsburg, U.S. Supreme Court

Justice Douglas, 278, 328, 337, 340, 345, 374, 415

Goldstein, Sidney, 43 Gonzales, DOJ Alberto, 50, 188 Gonzalez, Rep. Henry, 345 Gordon, Arnold, 133 Gore, Sen. Al, 94, 131, 170, 171,

198 Gorelick, Dep. Att. Gen. Jamie,

149, 390 Graziano, FAA John, 26, 41, 42 Grullon, Ramon Antonio, 110 Guart, Al, 96, 124 Guttlein, AUSA Jorge, 99

H Hamadei, Mohammed Ali, 53 Hamilton, Sen. Lee H., 356, 389,

391 Hanssen, Robert, 231 Hantman, Alfred, 29 Harrell, Frank, 44 Hartke, Sen. Vance, 51 Henry, Lawrence, 29, 36 Hizbullah, 209 Hoban, Christopher, 91 Hoffa, Jimmy, 39, 273 Homeland Security, Department

of, 26, 204, 205, 269, 340, 358 Hoorelbeke, Jerry Van, 241-247,

271, 273, 392 Hoover, J. Edgar, 30, 31, 33, 274,

303 Hughes, William, 58 Hussein, Saddam, 209

I Idema, Keith, 292 Immigration and Naturalization

Service (INS), 89, 90, 91, 104, 115, 118, 129

Iran-Contra, 59, 389 Islamic Jihad, 59 Ismoil, Eyad, 86, 249, 254-256,

258, 261, 262, 392, 396, 398, 399

J Jabarah, Mohammed Mansour,

228 Jackie Mason Show, 106 Jacobsen, Ben, 94, 96 Jdey, Abderraouf, 228, 229 Johnson, Jeh, 99-101 Jones, Raymond, 101 Jordan, ix, 54

K Kahane, Rabbi Meir, 130 Kallstrom, James K., 285 Kean, Thomas H., 356, 359, 375,

391 Kennedy, J.R., 116 KGB, 70, 158, 231, 239, 240 Khan, Niaz, 270 Khedker, Prince Chitresh, 137 Kissinger, Henry, 289, 355 Knipping, Richard, 98, 99, 110 Korczak, Boris, 239 Koupakis, Jerry, 258, 398 Kreindler and Kreindler, 351 Kreindler, Lee, 39, 351 Ku Klux Klan, 263 Kunstler, William, 130 Kuwait Airways, 53

L Lacroix, Roger L., 57 Lawlor, Robert, 94 Lawrence, David, 97, 118, 119,

133


Lemmer, Lenny, 95, 128 LeVecchio, FBI Lindley, 88, 89,

153, 169, 187, 189, 206-208, 234, 246, 262, 265, 270-273, 283, 285, 286, 391, 394

Liberato, Jose, 110, 116 Libya, 196, 399, 400 Lieberman, Donna, 329 Lieberman, Joseph I., 329, 340,

358 Lockerbie, 57, 77, 81, 150, 166,

292 Longerhan, FBI Thomas, 269 Los Angeles strike force, 243, 245 Lovera, Domingo Antonio, 93 Luciano, Charles, 264 Lynn, Christopher, 93

M Mack, Walter, 113 Mafia, 60, 61, 86, 87, 100, 101,

127, 154, 168, 187, 206, 234, 246, 262, 265, 270-273, 279, 281, 283, 342, 389-391

Malandros, John, 134 Maqda, 258 Marzouk, 248 Matthews, Rodney, 56 Mc Cain, Sen. John, 289 McLaughlin, John R., 132-135,

138, 139 Medellin drug cartel, 111 Mendez, Michael, 57 Mendoza, Rodolfo, 85, 237 Merrill Lynch & Co., 202 Metropolitan Correctional Center

(MCC), 86, 206, 247, 392 Meyer, U.S. Army Maj. Frederick

C., 62, 63, 66, 67, 86, 141, 142, 144, 145

Midhar, Khalid Al, 236 Millett, Col. Lewis, 59 Mineta, Norman, 200, 308, 340,

345 Mirabeaux, Daniel, 92

Mohammed, Khalid Shaikh, 83, 87

Molinari, Guy V., 106 Mollen Commission, 112, 114 Mollenhoff, Clark, 28 Monroney, Sen. Mike, 25 Mordkofsky, Norman, 101 Morgan Stanley Dean Witter &

Co, 202 Morgenthau, Robert, 119, 299 Mossad, 73, 161, 214, 291, 297,

318, 320 Moussaoui, Zacarias, 235 Mueller, FBI Robert, 265, 266,

268 Mujahedin, 122, 123 Mukasey, U.S. Dist. Judge

Michael B., 278, 347, 385, 416, 419

Mulholland, Jim, 109 Muller, Robert, 290, 380 Murad, Abdul Hakim, 84, 85, 86,

130, 206, 236, 237, 248, 250, 254, 255, 257, 258, 261, 262, 284, 392

Muslim Brotherhood, 129

N Napoli, Lou, 84, 261 National Police Defense

Foundation, 138 National Security Advisor, 135 National Security Agency XE

"National Security Agency (NSA)" (NSA), 232

National Security Agency (NSA), 232

National Transportation Safety Board, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 22, 41, 46, 57, 58, 61, 62, 66, 68, 69, 77, 79-81, 86, 141, 145, 149, 151, 153-157, 165, 171-174, 198, 221-223, 226, 227, 229, 230, 278, 287, 297, 302, 303, 306, 307, 315, 319-322, 324,

Gloomy Outlook for Americans 443325, 328, 341, 342, 352, 354, 363, 364, 372, 379, 391, 408

Nelson, Sen. Gaylord, 26 Nine Kings, 113, 114 Northwest Airlines, 50 Nosenko, Yuri Ivanovich, 240 Nowicki, Ronald, 99 Nunez, Angel, 103 NYPD, 84, 91, 93, 102, 103, 105,

106, 224, 267

O O’Reilly, Bill, 436 Operation Red Eye, 91 Orena, Vic, 263, 271

P Patel, U.S. district judge Marilyn,

175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 328, 343, 344, 373, 414

Pearlmuttan, 118 Pena, Federico, 131, 132 Pena- XE "Pena, Federico"

"Pena, Federico" "Pena, Federico" Gomez, Jose Francisco, 131, 132

Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office, 133, 135

Perez, Frank, 117 Philippine National Police, 85, 236 Phillips, Dr. J.D., 59 Pitts, Earl, 231 Playboy, 24 Pollard, Jonathan Jay, 210 Polyakov, Gen. Dmitri, 231 Powell, Colin, 218, 289 Powell, Eleanor, 79, 156 Powers, John, 223 PRD, 94, 131, 136, 137 Project Bodega, 92, 97, 98, 103,

112

R Raia, 258

Randolph, U.S. Crt of Appeals Judge A. Raymond, 374, 415

Rangel, Rep. Charles, 243, 245 Rashid, Mohammed, 240 Reed, Jr., U.S. District Judge

Edward C., 338, 374, 393, 413, 414

Rehnquist, U.S. Supreme Court Jus. William, 323, 333, 340

Reston, James, 27 Rice, Condoleezza, 289, 389 Riconosciuto, Michael, 72, 160,

264 Rodriguez, Hector, 96 Roemer, Jim, 289 Roma Corporation, 87, 168, 206,

250, 252, 254, 255 ROMA corporation, 188, 248, 254 Roselli, John, 264 Ross, Karl, 124 Rowley, FBI Coleen, 265-269 Rudman, Ann, 102 Rumsfeld, Donald, 289 Ruppert, Mike, 202 Russbacher, Gunther, 93, 127, 264 Russian federation, 231

S Sadat, Anwar, 129 Sanders, Jim, 154 Saurino, Benjamin, 113 Scarpa, Gregory Sr., 89, 169, 187,

206, 207, 273, 285, 391 Scarpa, Jr. Gregory, 86, 88, 89,

168, 169, 187, 188, 206-208, 234, 246, 247, 258, 262-265, 271-273, 281, 283-285, 390-394

Scarpino, Anthony, 101 Scheunemann, Randy, 135 Schiavo, Mary, 355 Schlesinger, William, 130 Sciolla, Guy, 133 Sea Crest Trading Company, 93,

94, 95, 110, 112, 116, 117, 119, 121-124, 130, 131


Sentelle, U.S. Crt of Appeals Judge David, 278, 337, 345, 374, 415

Sessions, William, 243 Shah, Khan Amin, 236, 284, 392 Shaheen, Michael E., 243 Shalabi, Mustafa, 129 Sheridan, George, 45, 46 Shiite, 53 Short Selling, 201 Sloatt, Don, 31 Smith, William French, 243 Southern Airlines, 50, 51 Soviet Union, 231-233, 240, 292,

368, 381 Spiro, Ian Stuart, 43 Spiro, James, 43 Stethem, Robert, 53 Stiles, Michael R., 138 Straub, Chester J., 416 Stretton, Samuel, 136 Stuart M. Speiser, Stuart M., 40,

41, 340

T Taliban, 305, 306 Tallon, Robin, 58 Taus, FBI Richard, 100, 124, 129,

234, 265, 266, 271, 273, 291 Taveras, Erasmo, 97 Tenet, CIA Dir. George, 202, 358,

390 Then, Freddy, 102 Then’s Brothers Grocery Store,

67, 92, 97, 98, 102, 146, 203, 222, 224, 271, 344, 400, 436

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361, 295, 307, 325, 328, 334, 342, 365, 382, 411

Torricelli, Rep. Robert, 38 Traficant, Rep. James, 110, 114,

115, 123, 137 Trombettas, Victor, 223 TWA Flight 800, 62, 66, 68, 69,

75-81, 87, 141, 145-147, 149-157, 163-174, 188, 206, 207,

221, 226, 229, 248, 254, 258, 285, 297, 305, 306, 309, 310, 321, 390, 391, 397, 398, 399

U Utah State Bar Association, 41

V Victims Compensation Fund, 346 Villano, Anthony, 262 Vincent, Billie, 24

W Waldie, Rep. Jerome, 32-35 Walker, Gen. Edwin, 36 Washington Heights, 91, 94, 96,

98, 105, 110, 112, 131 Watts, Clyde, 36 Waxman, Rep. Henry, 282 Weinstein, U.S. Dist. Judge Jack

B., 286 Weisknopf, Steven, 269 Wells Fargo, 91 Wesley, Richard C., 417 Whitman, Carl, 44, 45, 46 Williams, FBI David, 249 Winter Hill gang, 233, 264, 280,

299 World Trade Center, 83, 84, 86,

88, 95, 105, 123, 127-131, 138, 139, 168, 192, 193, 202, 206, 209, 216, 221, 228, 236, 247, 255, 284, 291, 297, 304, 310, 316, 317, 319, 322, 347, 348, 353, 380, 403-407, 410, 415

Y Yasin, Abdul Rahman, 284 Young Communist League, 101 Young, Rep. C.W., 58 Younis, Fawaz, 239 Yount, Joseph, 27 Yousef, Ramzi Ahmed, 83-89,

130, 168, 169, 188, 206-209,

Gloomy Outlook for Americans 445229, 236, 237, 247-262, 284, 291, 390-401

Yurchenko, Vitaly, 240

Z Zelikow, Philip, 389, 390 Zimmer, Dick, 110


INDEX 447


Education

Blowback, 9-11, and cover-ups (2008)